The new Bush budget passed by the House has some very harmful cuts

[Robbien]

This budget provides $1.3 billion less than what the Veterans' Affairs Committee recommended - on a bipartisan basis - for vital veterans' health care programs.

This budget cuts appropriations for environmental protection by $1.5 billion below last year's already low level, and keeps funding below the 2004 enacted level for every year in the budget.

This pathetic budget cuts Homeland Security funding by $857 million below the President's request for 2005-2009, applying the cut to all homeland security activities OUTSIDE of the Department of Defense...things like harbor security, chemical plant, and nuclear plant protection.

This budget underfunds education. It provides $8.8 billion below the authorized level for No Child Left Behind programs.

This budget fails to protect Social Security, spending the entire $1 trillion Social Security surplus from 2005 to 2009, despite repeated promises not to spend a penny of it. Ask yourself what the point of this spending is. Three reasons: first, it will allow the Bush Administration to buy more weaponry for the Iraq war, rewarding George H. W. Bush's company, the Carlyle Group; second, it will give Vice President, Dick Cheney's company, Halliburton, a chance to bring in some more bacon before they scamper out of Iraq with their tails between their legs; third, it offers the Bush Administration the opportunity to not raise taxes because they are stealing from the piggy bank instead.

There are presently 28 states working on anti-outsourcing legislation but nothing is happening in Washington.

These details were extracted from this article
http://www.greenbaynewschron.com/page.html?article=125049

[redqueen]

1. Gotta make up for revenue lost to tax cuts for the rich

:grr:

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bridget Burke]

3. So, everybody who makes less than you is a "bottom feeder"?

You don't care about education, the environment or meaningful protection against terror?

Wonderful priorities there.

[redqueen]

4. I did not state an income level,

your defensiveness is telling.

Your cursing and dividing the taxpayers up as you have is also telling.

For your information, the displeasure I have is for those who are actually rich, and not middle class, which you are.

Did you really think you were rich?! LMMFAO!!!

Check out the top 2%. Better, yet, the top 1%. Or even better, the top 1/2 of 1%. THEY'RE rich.

You? Not even close.

Read this, please. Why Bush Ignores the Numbers