Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush sends Congress $2.57 trillion budget
AP ^ | 2/7/5 | MARTIN CRUTSINGER

Posted on 02/07/2005 7:56:15 AM PST by SmithL

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush sent Congress a $2.57 trillion budget plan Monday that seeks deep spending cuts across a wide swath of government from reducing subsidies paid to the nation's farmers, cutting health care payments for poor people and veterans and trimming spending on the environment and education.

The budget - the most austere of Bush's presidency - would eliminate or vastly scale back 150 government programs. It will spark months of contentious debate in Congress, where lawmakers will fight to protect their favored programs.

The spending document projects that the deficit will hit a record $427 billion this year, the third straight year that the red ink in dollar terms has set a record. Bush projects that the deficit will fall to $390 billion in 2006 and gradually decline to $233 billion in 2009 and $207 billion in 2010.

Bush's 2006 spending plan, for the budget year that begins next Oct. 1, counts on a healthy economy to boost revenues by 6.1 percent to $2.18 trillion. Spending, meanwhile, would grow by 3.5 percent to $2.57 trillion.

However, outside defense, homeland security and the government's huge mandatory programs such as Social Security, Bush proposes cutting spending for the rest of government by 0.5 percent, the first such proposed cut since the Reagan administration battled with its own soaring deficits.

Of 23 major government agencies, 12 would see their budget authority reduced next year, including cuts of 9.6 percent at Agriculture and 5.6 percent at the Environmental Protection Agency.

In his budget message to Congress, Bush said, "In order to sustain our economic expansion, we must continue pro-growth policies and enforce even greater spending restraint across the federal government."

But Democrats complained that Bush was resorting to draconian cuts that would hurt the needy in order to protect his first term tax cuts that primarily benefited the wealthy.

"This budget is part of the Republican plan to cut Social Security benefits while handing out lavish tax breaks for multimillionaires," said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "Its cuts in veterans programs, health care and education reflect the wrong priorities and its huge deficits are fiscally irresponsible."

Bush's budget does not reflect the costs for his No. 1 domestic priority, overhauling Social Security by allowing younger workers to set up private investment accounts. It also does not include any new spending for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, The administration has said it will seek in coming weeks an additional $80 billion for the cost of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for this year.

Critics also contend that the five-year deficit projections also mask the costs of some Bush initiatives such as making his first-term tax cuts permanent, the bulk of which do not show up until after 2010. The budget puts the 10-year cost of making the president's tax cut proposals permanent at $1.29 trillion.

Bush's budget proposed increasing military spending by 4.8 percent to $419.3 billion in 2006. However, even with the increase a number of major weapons programs, including Bush's missile defense system and the B-2 stealth bomber, would see cuts from this year's levels.

Aside from defense and homeland security, favored Bush programs included a new $1.5 billion high school performance program, expanded Pell Grants for low-income college students and more support for community health clinics.

One of the most politically sensitive targets on Bush's hit list is the government support program for farmers, which he wants to trim by $5.7 billion over the next decade, which would represent cuts to farmers growing a wide range of cuts from cotton and rice to corn, soybeans and wheat.

Overall, the administration projected saving $8.2 billion in agriculture programs over the next decade including trimming food stamp payments to the poor by $1.1 billion.

Other programs set for cuts include the Army Corps of Engineers, whose dam and other waterway projects are extremely popular in Congress; the Energy Department; several health programs under the Health and Human Services Department and federal subsidies for the Amtrak passenger railroad.

About one-third of the programs being targeted for elimination are in the Education Department, including federal grant programs for local schools in such areas as vocational education, anti-drug efforts and Even Start, a $225 million literacy program.

In all, the president proposed savings of $137 billion over 10 years in mandatory programs with much of that occurring in reductions in Medicaid, the big federal-state program that provides health care for the poor, and in payments the Veterans Administration makes for health care. The administration proposed no savings for Medicare, the giant health care program for the elderly.

Many of the spending cuts in the budget are repeats of efforts the administration has proposed and Congress has rejected previously.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: budget; bush43; federalspending; term2
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-209 next last
To: k2blader
Well, at 34 years of age, I have found myself in a dying field of work(what a dumb decision I made). With the new technology and solid state transmitters that can transmit a digital signal almost as far as the old klystron tube transmitter, I am like the maytag repair man. As soon as the FCC allows us to stop transmitting an NTSC(analog) signal the need to have someone maintaining a transmitter site will be over.
I could get a job at RadioShack. But, I was looking for a job when I got this one!
181 posted on 02/07/2005 8:15:29 PM PST by Pointblank (Peace or fist-a-cuffs!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: traviskicks; All

"Get smart. Vote Libertarian.
---

I think I will from now on. Bye Bye Republican party."

IMHO...Way to throw away your vote.

Even the most well known Liberal in the country Neal Boortz doesn't vote for the Libertarian candidate in the presidential elections.


182 posted on 02/08/2005 12:32:23 AM PST by txradioguy (Freedom Of Speech Makes It Much Easier To Spot The Idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: txradioguy

IMHO...Way to throw away your vote.
---

In the next 3 years if Bush cuts the budget significantly I may change my mind. I certainly will keep any donations to org like the Club For Growth, where I know they will be used wisely.

I don't think it will be throwing your vote away, I think a lot of people would vote libertarian but don't for that reason. If a critical mass could reach a 'tipping point' then it would really jolt the Republican establishment. Imagine if we just had one Libertarian Senator? Imagine the holds they could put on all these various junk activities. Also, keep in mind Eugene Debs socialist running all those years at 8% resulted in the New Deal by the Democrats who moved left too. If we can get a 8% Libertarian ticket I'd hope the Republicans would do something similar. My conscience will not let me vote for someone who raised the budget by 1/3rd!

The most ridiculous thing to happen, besides this Medicaid bloated bill, is all this Tsunami aid that Bush promised. Our money! Despite that private donations were more then twice public donations anyway!


183 posted on 02/08/2005 3:22:55 AM PST by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/blackconservatism.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: inquest

inquest wrote: "Spending, meanwhile, would grow by 3.5 percent to $2.57 trillion.
Anyone know if that's in real dollars?"


we are using euros to pay off the debt... better than real dollars...

teeman


184 posted on 02/08/2005 4:23:41 AM PST by teeman8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: shellshocked
40% - I believe it. People really have no idea how much they pay in taxes. Most of those cell phone users don't notice that something like 25% of their bill is taxes; likewise with gasoline. Cable TV probably includes huge taxes but I wouldn't know because I don't subscribe. I know these things are included in the totals we've already discussed. I'm just ranting about the people's lack of perception. The tax bite is huge.
185 posted on 02/08/2005 7:22:31 AM PST by cdrw (Freedom and responsibility are inseparable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: jb6
yep - virtually every graduate student of macroeconomics learns the crowding out theory (maybe the undergrads too) and it is absolutely true. Every dollar the government takes is money that would have been available to fund private business if they had not taken it. Their take drives up the cost of money to businesses and squeezes out the ones at the margin.
186 posted on 02/08/2005 7:25:53 AM PST by cdrw (Freedom and responsibility are inseparable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: cdrw

Yeah, I got a minor in economics and that and the looming IOU ridden Social Security disaster were two of our major topics, that and the bell curve of taxation.


187 posted on 02/08/2005 7:38:55 AM PST by jb6 (Truth = Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: jb6
I never did catch the bell curve of taxation but then I did my studies back in the late 80's so either that model hadn't yet been conceived or my prof's decided to ignore it. I've not kept up with macro over the years but I found it very interesting when I was in school.
188 posted on 02/08/2005 8:25:24 AM PST by cdrw (Freedom and responsibility are inseparable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: jb6

This attempt at cuts is simply lipservice to the federal spending issue. California is doing its part, though . . . receiving only $0.78 per $1.00 given to the feds.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/california/taxingspending.html

What sez you, New Mexico???


189 posted on 02/08/2005 11:17:24 AM PST by LiveFree (Or Die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Well, I'll make my standard plea that when y'all look at your taxes for 2004, and see that you're getting a big refund back, raise your deductions (M-0, M-1, M-2, etc.) and KEEP YOUR MONEY IN YOUR POCKET for 2005. (Just estimate your upcoming income for 2005, and check the schedules in the handy-dandy tax booklet.)

Help me cut off the blood supply to the government. Pay what you owe, but not a penny more! The money in that budget belongs to us you know!

Oops! Gotta go! Black Helicopters circling, LOL!


190 posted on 02/08/2005 11:25:47 AM PST by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: txradioguy
IMHO...Way to throw away your vote.

Completely worn out argument. Conservatives are finding out how they threw their vote away on Bush. There's only so many times you can fool people before they finally stop falling for it.

191 posted on 02/08/2005 1:45:41 PM PST by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: malakhi
I'm dissatisfied with a $2.57 trillion budget, with a record $427 billion deficit. If that makes me a cynic and a malcontent, so be it. So much for being the party of fiscal conservatism.

Well said. I see no Dept getting the axe, so it's just business as usual. I am a Cynic and a Malcontent and damn proud of it! Blackbird.

192 posted on 02/08/2005 3:09:55 PM PST by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST

Are you kidding me?

You need to live in the real world...this budget won't get passed with these cuts. So what makes you think a fiscally sound budget would lol.

People need to look in the mirror and realize that we get what we want. I vote for cutting Veterans benefits, college loans and doing away with mortgage interest deductions lol....never gonna happen.


193 posted on 02/08/2005 3:20:01 PM PST by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: inquest

Ok I'll ask you the same thing I ask the Liberals I spar with when they trot out YOUR same old tired arguement.

Plese explain just exactly HOW people "threw their vote away on Bush." Especially inlight of the record popular vote turnout this year in FAVOR of W?

And just exactly in your quasi liberal view did Bush "fool the people"?

Can't wait to hear your thesis on this one. Even though I probably already know what you're going to say.


194 posted on 02/08/2005 4:48:32 PM PST by txradioguy (Freedom Of Speech Makes It Much Easier To Spot The Idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: All

And for our Liberaltarian friends here's what THE leading voice for your aprty has to say on the budget. He sounds WAY more grounded on the issues than most of you do. Oh and if the "throwing away your vote" is a "tired arguement"...refresh my memory on just WHO the Libertarian candidate is and how many votes he got?


Here's what Boortz has to say:

"The media will read the budget, see that a program is being cut, then run right out and find at least two people who's lives will just absolutely be ruined by the "cuts." But isn't this quite the double standard? Weren't we being told just a few weeks ago that the deficit was out of control? Why..it was the highest ever! (Not true, of course.) Now that Bush is actually doing something about the deficit, the left will have none of it.

To the left there is one and only one way to solve a budget deficit .. and that is to raise taxes, and to raise taxes only on rich people.

Just as with most major issues, the Democrats have no ideas, no plan and nothing to offer. They're concerned about the deficit, but they don't want to cut any spending. Their answer is going to be to raise taxes. Unfortunately, the majority of the Republicans in the House and Senate probably won't have the gonads to cut any spending either.

By the way, most of these "cuts" are just going to be cuts in the growth of spending."


195 posted on 02/08/2005 4:52:06 PM PST by txradioguy (Freedom Of Speech Makes It Much Easier To Spot The Idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Finally, some fiscal responsibility from our President.

!

196 posted on 02/08/2005 5:01:05 PM PST by Types_with_Fist (I'm on FReep so often that when I read an article at another site I scroll down for the comments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: txradioguy
Plese explain just exactly HOW people "threw their vote away on Bush."

Conservatives did, if they thought they were advancing the conservative agenda by voting for him. Total waste. Bush isn't going to do anything for them if he knows he doesn't have to earn their vote. Hence, voting for him unconditionally means that their vote doesn't actually count for anything with him.

And just exactly in your quasi liberal view did Bush "fool the people"?

Now there's an example of your total lack of reading comprehension. Probably the most glaring specimen I've ever seen on FR.

197 posted on 02/08/2005 5:16:56 PM PST by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: inquest

Way to duck and dodge. YOu throw out baseless statements without showing any proof of the alleged trickery.

This president is the first man in a LONG time who is actually doing what he told the people he would. Is that hard for you to comprehend or what?

"Now there's an example of your total lack of reading comprehension. Probably the most glaring specimen I've ever seen on FR."

Again you name call without providing proof of the wild and appearently baseless claims you make.

I follow politics. I haven't seen any kind of the treachery you accuse the President of.

Sounds like it is YOU who need to do some updating of your reading comprehension.


198 posted on 02/08/2005 5:24:47 PM PST by txradioguy (Freedom Of Speech Makes It Much Easier To Spot The Idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: inquest

Oh and nice to avoid the questions about who the Liberaltarian Presidential candidate was and how many votes he got. Way to stay focused on the smear and avoid answering the tough questions.

Also I'm shocked...SHOCKED that you have no comment on what the best and brighest voice for Libertarians had to say about the Presidents budget.

But then that would require thought and candor and not potshot soundbite smears on your part.

And I thought this might end up being a stimunating debate. Guess I was wrong.


199 posted on 02/08/2005 5:28:29 PM PST by txradioguy (Freedom Of Speech Makes It Much Easier To Spot The Idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

Comment #200 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-209 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson