To: Mo1
A very significant portion of Bush's increases have been for descretionary non-defense spending. Here are his numbers compared to a true conservative.
Spending by Department
Percent Change in Real Outlays in First Three Years
| Department |
Reagan |
Bush |
| Agriculture |
-13.2% |
8.5% |
| Commerce |
-29.0% |
9.6% |
| Defense |
18.6% |
27.6% |
| Education |
-21.8% |
60.8% |
| Energy |
-19.6% |
22.4% |
| Health & Human Services |
9.0% |
21.4% |
| Housing & Urban Dev. |
-3.7% |
6.1% |
| Interior |
-4.6% |
23.4% |
| Justice |
1.2% |
11.0% |
| Labor |
-29.4% |
56.0% |
| State |
9.5% |
32.5% |
| Transportation |
-13.0% |
-1.3% |
| Treasury |
31.1% |
-7.0% |
| Veteran Affairs |
-3.9% |
29.4% |
source: Budget of the U.S. Government and Mid-Session Review for FY2004.
To: Your Nightmare
Bush promised to run based on Education and Health issues. It seems that he kept his promise.
976 posted on
01/22/2004 12:12:23 PM PST by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: Your Nightmare
A very significant portion of Bush's increases have been for descretionary non-defense spending. Here are his numbers compared to a true conservative.
Well, I hate to be the one to say it but isn't it more relevant to evaluate these on, say, what percentage of national GDP each president proposes to spend on each of these categories?
After all, a listing like yours doesn't really tell us what Reagan's or Bush's spending increased or decreased from.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson