Bush proposes legal block on Congress spending

Yahoo! News ^ | January 31, 2004 | Yahoo! News

[Print]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - President George W. Bush (news - web sites) said he would place a legal block on overspending by the US Congress as he hit back at critics who have accused him of being reckless with US finances.

AFP/POOL/File Photo

"To assure that Congress observes spending discipline, now and in the future, I propose making spending limits the law," Bush declared Saturday in his weekly radio address, ahead of the release Monday of the fiscal 2005 budget, in which the deficit is expected to hit a new record high.

"This simple step would mean that every additional dollar the Congress wants to spend in excess of spending limits must be matched by a dollar in spending cuts elsewhere.

"Budget limits must mean something, and not just serve as vague guidelines to be routinely violated. This single change in the procedures of the Congress would bring further spending restraint to Washington."

The Republican president faces mounting pressure over his financial policy as opposition Democrats step up their attacks in election year.

The White House announced Friday that the 2005 budget deficit would hit 521 billion dollars, a record in dollar terms.

But Bush, who has blamed US economic troubles on the September 11, 2001, attacks, wars in Afghanistan (news - web sites) and Iraq (news - web sites), and a recession he inherited from former president Bill Clinton (news - web sites), insisted that his spending policies were responsible.

He reaffirmed his aim of cutting the budget deficit in half within five years.

He said that "Americans will see my priorities clearly at work" when the budget is released Monday.

"We will devote the resources necessary to win the war on terror and protect our homeland. We'll provide compassionate help to seniors, to schoolchildren, and to Americans in need of job training. And we will be responsible with the people's money by cutting the deficit in half over five years."

Under the Bush plan, defense spending will increase seven percent, including a 3.5-percent pay increase for the military, homeland security spending will rise 10 percent to 30.5 billion dollars.

"This money will help tighten security at our borders, airports and seaports, and improve our defenses against biological attack," Bush told the nation.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation budget will rise 11 percent, including a 357 million dollar increase in counterterrorism spending. "America will not let its guard down in our war on terror," he vowed.

An extra 600 million dollars will also go toward assistance for the elderly to buy drugs and more money for public schools.

"We're meeting these priorities within a responsible budget," Bush said.

The president has proposed that overall "discretionary spending" will grow at less than four percent and non-security spending would rise less than one percent, which he said would be "the smallest such proposed increase in 12 years."

"By exercising spending discipline in Washington DC, we will reduce the deficit and meet our most basic priorities."

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

A Whatcha Think Bump

[Paul C. Jesup]

The internet was originally devoloped at ATAT using basic networks, the miltary looked into it, and devoloped it further, then private companies, citizens and colleges looked at the miltary's networks and build their own, the later part of this phaze was when HTML was invented. Later after that, with an act of Congress and private contracts, all the networks were tried together to create the modern internet.

[FSPress]

Nothing will be done if the spineless politicians stand there and say that there is nothing they can do. Get after it, or it will be gotten after very harshly. What part of deport don't you understand! You are hiding behinds Clinton's skirt.

[Doohickey]

Pot calling the kettle black BUMP.

[jigsaw]

How nice if we could enact a way that the constituents of each Congressman are taxed in proportion to how their Congressman spends.

The more he spends, the higher his constituents' taxes, and vice versa.

[alnick]

"This simple step would mean that every additional dollar the Congress wants to spend in excess of spending limits must be matched by a dollar in spending cuts elsewhere.

The "true conservatives" will find something to gripe about with this as well.

The "true conservatives" around here fall mostly into two groups (please note the word "mostly"): Right-wing extremists and democrat plants.

[RJCogburn]

Jeez, I didn't think it would ever come to this, but I'm truly sorry to say this guy is a phony.

He has never used his veto.
He sold the Medicare bill as a $400billion deal - bad enough - but now tells us he was of by a just a tad....>30%! And he apparently knew it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1068912/posts

[Grampa Dave]

"To assure that Congress observes spending discipline, now and in the future, I propose making spending limits the law," Bush declared Saturday in his weekly radio address, ahead of the release Monday of the fiscal 2005 budget, in which the deficit is expected to hit a new record high.


This sounds like a good plan to me:

"This simple step would mean that every additional dollar the Congress wants to spend in excess of spending limits must be matched by a dollar in spending cuts elsewhere.


"Budget limits must mean something, and not just serve as vague guidelines to be routinely violated. This single change in the procedures of the Congress would bring further spending restraint to Washington."

[flashbunny]

"By exercising spending discipline in Washington DC, we will reduce the deficit and meet our most basic priorities."

By 'most basic priorities' he obviously means public art. Where would be be as a country if we did not fund artists who are unable to make it in the private sector?!?!?!?

We'd be a country without horrible, unwanted, crappy art. And that's just a place I don't want to think about.

[cksharks]

For one thing they include HOMELAND SECCURITY as discretionary spending. If you take that out then it drops to around 4%.

[jpsb]

[You can't make this stuff up! LOL!]

Nope, put in a book and no one would believe it. I think Bush's long term memory must be gone. he has obviously forgotten just who it was that busted the budget.

[RJCogburn]

The reason Bush has vetoed nothing is because he has a GOP congress and the GOP congress spends on Homeland Security and the war on terror as they must. He has no need to veto that. He can interdict legislation in the formative stage.

That is the best one yet!

[alnick]

So your position is that spending should not be limited, then? Otherwise, you'd back him on this one rather than gripe.

[NittanyLion]

For one thing they include HOMELAND SECCURITY as discretionary spending. If you take that out then it drops to around 4%.

Actually, it doesn't. I've looked at the numbers myself, and it just doesn't work out as you claim.

[FSPress]

I would settle for having every additional one of my dollars that George wants to spend...My money is burning a hole in George Bush's pants pocket.

[alnick]

So your position is that spending should not be limited, then?

[sauropod]

Hmmmm....

[sauropod]

;-)

[Dane]

If a Democrat was doing the exact same thing, you'd be screaming bloody murder.

A democrat wouldn't be proposing a legal block on spending.

A democrat would be proposing a legal block on tax cuts.

[gorush]

We already have a law...it's called the Constitution...and nobody pays any attention to it. There is no way they are going to start now.