http://www.msnbc.com/news/959234.asp?0cv=KB10&cp1=1With the federal budget deficit approaching $500 billion, lawmakers are furious about the way the administration has played them for fools when it comes to paying for Iraq
Aug. 29 — The U.S. administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, delivered the bad news this week. The war in Iraq will cost tens of billions of dollars, which means we’re approaching a collision between President Bush’s fiscal policy and national-security needs.
SO HOW DID Bush respond? He fired off a letter to Congress to cut the pay raise promised to federal workers. He said the country is in a state of national emergency and has been since 9/11. The pay cut saves mere pennies compared to the billions Bush needs, but bureaucrats are easy scapegoats. The public doesn’t pay much attention when a government worker gets screwed.
Here’s a suggestion: what if Bush had suspended the cut on the estate tax, calling on both workers and the wealthy to kick in their share? That would be a bit more credible. With the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reporting this week that the federal budget deficit is approaching a record $500 billion, lawmakers are furious about the way the administration has played them for fools when it comes to paying for Iraq. “The Iraqis ask, ‘Why can’t you turn on the lights?’ We have a George C. Marshall plan with a Grover Norquist budget,” says a Senate Republican.
Norquist is known as “Mr. Tax Cut.” He’s president of Americans for Tax Reform and the grinch who steers the GOP’s antitax movement. Cutting taxes is the holy grail for the Republican right, but draining the treasury runs counter to national security. There isn’t enough money to properly fund homeland security or pick up the pace of reconstruction in Iraq, though the administration will be back for a war “supplemental” when Congress returns next week. That’s Washington-speak for billing the taxpayers, who pay for the war with reduced government services at home.
more