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

Skip to comments.

Bush sends $2.9 trillion budget to Congress
Belleville News-Democrat ^ | February 5, 2007 | Staff

Posted on 02/05/2007 7:50:51 AM PST by MadIvan

WASHINGTON - President Bush submits a $2.9 trillion spending request today to Capitol Hill that seeks billions of dollars more to fight the Iraq war and tries to restrain the spiraling cost of the government's big health care programs.

Responding to the new political realities of a Democratic-controlled Congress, Bush will propose balancing the budget in five years. Democrats charged that Bush wants to make painful cuts across a wide swath of government programs to protect his tax cuts and to keep funneling money to the unpopular Iraq war.

"It just gives you sticker shock. Every time you turn around it's another $100 billion," Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said of Bush's war spending.

For the first time, Bush will spell out details of the spending requests for Iraq and Afghanistan in the budget books. Previously, he has lumped that spending into supplemental requests with less detail.

Bush said he would ask for an additional $100 billion for Iraq and the global war on terrorism this year, on top of $70 billion already sought. For 2008, that spending would drop to $145 billion and fall to $50 billion in 2009, although administration officials conceded that the 2008 and 2009 requests could go higher depending on the progress of the war effort.

White House budget director Rob Portman said Sunday that the spending includes the cost of increasing troop strength in Iraq by 21,500, an increase that opponents want Congress to go on record as opposing in upcoming nonbinding resolutions. The administration projects that the troop increase will cost $5.6 billion this year, a figure that critics say is too low.

"We believe the president's plan will be successful," Portman said on CNN. "We're giving Congress exactly what Congress asked for on a bipartisan basis, more transparency as to our costs and more information."

The federal deficit hit an all-time high under Bush of $413 billion in 2004. It has been declining since that time and the 2008 budget projects it will continue to decline and show a surplus in 2012, three years after Bush leaves office.

To accomplish those reductions, Bush would allow only modest growth in the government programs outside of defense and homeland security. He is proposing eliminations or sharp reductions in 141 government programs, for a savings over five years of $12 billion.

Bush also will seek to trim spending on farm subsidies by $18 billion over five years, mainly by reducing payments to wealthier farmers, an effort certain to spark resistance among farm state lawmakers. Bush's budget would achieve nearly $100 billion in savings over five years by trimming increases in Medicare and Medicaid.


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: budget; bushbasherhideout; drunksailor; spending; trillions; yayanotherbushbash
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 last
To: almcbean

"That's true conservatism - not just voting against Al Gore."

If you want "true conservatism" put up true conservative candidates, put out a meaningful message and prepare to take your lumps until the word gets out.

This means putting up candidates against the incumbent RINOS and be prepared to roll in the mud with them. We think our message is enough to win. It isn't. We have to be prepared to spend billions to wrest away control from the RINOS and the RATS.

Until we do that, we will be seeing a lot more of the McCains of the world.


41 posted on 02/05/2007 9:56:30 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (The Clintons: A Malignant Malfeasance of the Most Morbid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Our budget for this year is £552 billion.

Or slightly over $1 trillion dollars. Kind of makes ours look not so bad by comparison, considering difference in population and GNP and all. Thanks.

42 posted on 02/05/2007 10:09:05 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Puddleglum

None of that is realistic and would be doomed to failure...this is why purists never win....ths solution is this:

Grow govt at a slower rate than nominal GDP (3% real plus 3% inflation is 6% nominal growth annually). Say grow govt at 3% annually, thus after 8 years Spending/GDP will fall from 22% where it is today to 18% of GDP in 8 years, making govt smaller than at anytime since 1958...before medicare and medicaid, before head start..etc etc...that's the best you can hope for


43 posted on 02/05/2007 10:32:59 AM PST by Oct1967
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

I'd like to add - Get rid of the Department of Indian Affairs.


44 posted on 02/05/2007 10:37:41 AM PST by Texas Federalist (Gingrich '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 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