Spending Cuts May Not Defray Katrina Costs (Even if Ted Kennedy's Meal Card is Confiscated)

AP ^ | 9/22/2005 | AP -

[JewishRighter]

AP - 2 hours, 30 minutes ago WASHINGTON - The White House and its GOP allies in Congress will have to be creative if they're going to use spending cuts to defray the cost of Hurricane Katrina rescue and recovery efforts. Many of the ideas circulating are likely political nonstarters like delaying the start of the Medicare prescription drug benefit or favorite White House cuts that have previously been rejected by Congress — some of them several years in a row.

[JewishRighter]

Even if we cut down on Diane Feinstein's make-up allowance, Nancy Pelosi's plastic surgery medical reimbursement, Chuck Schumer's brylcream allotment, free government cheese, Hillary Clinton's pantsuits, Bubbas prophylactic supply, Sandy Berger's taylor bills, even if the Clinton's reimburse the government for the stolen furniture and the vandalism, the use of the Lincoln bedroom for a campaign finance whorehouse...even then we can't pay for Katrina?????

[frankjr]

What if we confiscate his drink card?

[JewishRighter]

hic, I don't know, that could be dangerous, because, hic, then he'd cost us even more at the Betty Ford clinic.

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

Now this is some funny stuff. A sad but true PING!!

[Ignatius J Reilly]

If the congress can cut spending from the budget now to pay out hurricane relief funds, why were they ever approved in the first place??

Democrats have been described as the tax and spend pary for years, soon Republicans will be known as debt and spend. I'm disgusted with those jokers in DC, on both sides of the aisle.

[newgeezer]

they're going to use spending cuts to defray the cost of Hurricane Katrina rescue and recovery

I can only sit here and wonder, ...

With the alleged party of smaller government in charge, why did it take Katrina to make these spending cuts possible??

[quantfive]

How about we rebuild the port only, put a much smaller concrete seawall to protect the port, leave the French Quarter which is on higher dry ground anyway, then scrap the rest. Business comes in two form for NO. Energy at the port and tourists for the French Quarter. I don't want to sound insentitive here, but why rebuild something to prove a point? It would be more cost effective to give every New Orleans a check for $5,000 to relocate to start a new life and call it a day.

[Paulus Invictus]

It's a perfect time to eliminate many DC tax rip-off agencies. Let's start with the Dept. of Education, Commerce, HUD, NPR, Dept. of Labor, Dept. of Agriculture, NEA, IRS (plug in a simple flat tax), and all of the other non-effective alphabets as well. Look up how many agencies, commissions and other thieving orgs there are and you will puke (see Google under govt. agencies). The timing could not be better, but it takes guts. Do they have it?

Naaaaah! The pols are all cowards and active participants in the thievery!

[Ruth A.]

It sounds as though their reasoning is: If it won't cover the full cost, why should we use cuts? Because covering a part of it is the start!

[blackie]

Hang 'em High ~ Bump! ;)

[JewishRighter]

Hate to have to agree with you.

[Hillary'sMoralVoid]

We need to rethink the concept of "cost". This is not cost, it is investment and future cost avoidance.

I have no problem investing in rebuilding an area because we can provide better long-term infrastructure with less vulnerability to storms, more efficient use of energy resources, and greater long-term reliability.

In fact, we need to do less 'giveaway" programs and more programs that improve infrastructure, as those dollars provide a long-term payback. Like them or not, the WPA projects of the 1930s more than paid for themselves by improving our nations infrastructure and increasing the ability to produce and transport goods.

[NonValueAdded]

Perhaps another FReeper can put their finger on the data but isn't there a study that shows every dollar spent by NASA has a much higher return than most other government spending? If you want to use the term "investment" to mean spending, then NASA is one of the few places where that is a truism. Remember, every penny spent on the space program is spent here on earth.

Personally, I think the space program is essential to the longterm survival of the human race and if we don't get some colonies established before we kill ourselves off, it's game over. The only bright spot in a defunding of manned exploration would be if that cleared the way for private sector leadership. I dare GWB to privatize NASA!

[JewishRighter]

Yes. The only reason that the entire budget is not given to NASA is that they still won't fill the pothole in front of Mrs. Quackenbush's house.

[Nathan Zachary]

"What if we confiscate his drink card?"

That would save a bunch! How about cutting Senator's expense accounts completely? Only those who are officialy the party in power should have expense accounts, drastically trimmed ones.

[Nathan Zachary]

"Personally, I think the space program is essential to the longterm survival of the human race and if we don't get some colonies established before we kill ourselves off, it's game over."

LMAO!! And just where do you plan on putting these colonies? How do you plan on getting them there (alive) ? We can't even spot a viable solar system, never mind travel billions of light years to get there. Don't worry, God has a spot all planned. Have a little faith.

[JewishRighter]

With the wasted money flowing through the hands of our politicians, we can build another solar system!!

[layman]

With the alleged party of smaller government in charge, why did it take Katrina to make these spending cuts possible?

Great question ... especially when we are EIGHT TRILLION in debt. Since the 200 billion will be spent over several years it would require a simple 3.5% across the board cut in our 2.6 TRILLION annual spending budget to cover it. Can't the bumbling bureaucracy get by with 3.5% less for two years? How about a 3.5% pay cut? How about a Fatwa on PORK? Damn! Just DAMN!