Bush's sham budget

[emad]

IHT
The New York Times Wednesday, February 9, 2005

President George W. Bush's latest deficit-steeped budget, for all its tough talk of reining in spending, stands out as a monument to misplaced political capital. It would take some hard work, indeed, to get Congress to face up to the binge of deficit spending that is haunting the United States and future generations of taxpayers. Yet Bush is not going to face the music. Instead, he's investing his precious re-election clout in pushing a wildly expensive plan to divert some Social Security payments to private accounts, a step that would not even address the long-term financial problems with the current system. His proposed budget, meanwhile, is a picture of reduced revenue and swollen pockets of hidden spending. The lip service about draconian clampdowns will hardly solve the problem, particularly in the eyes of the international markets that are studying the administration for signs of commitment to closing the budget deficit.
.
Bush is right to call for a healthy analysis of government programs to determine which ones cost more than they are worth. But the reductions he proposes for the biggest targets are timid ones.
.
To his credit, for instance, Bush is asking for a reduction in farm and commodity programs. But his proposed cut of 5 percent - should it somehow survive in a Congress that has never shown signs of being willing to stand up to agribusiness - would hardly end that bloated giveaway. It offers little help for family farmers struggling to deal with the out-of-whack economics of an agricultural system that is distorted by monster subsidies to corporate farmers, or for poor farmers in the developing world who are hobbled by artificially cheap American exports.
.
While the Pentagon budget continues to boom, Bush has at least called for paring back some of the more unnecessary weapons programs from the cold war. But even if he manages to get the cuts past the arms industry's congressional protectors, slowing weapons programs is never enough. History shows that these programs will be back to eat up tax dollars another day if Bush fails to kill off the contracts that feed them.
.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/08/opinion/edbudget.html

[Democrat 4 Ever]

1. Simple budget math - why isn't anyone calling King Chimpy on it?

Unfortunately, my budget has to include all of my expenses. It would be so much easier if I could forget mortgage or car payments. How about just forgetting to include that health insurance premium, the gas and electric or even the grocery figures into the mix? I'd look like I was on the brink of affluence if I could just ignore those sniggling little facts staring me in the face each month.

Why aren't the Dems calling the repugs on the facts that several MAJOR expenses are not included in Dim Son's fantasy budget? Like the cost of a war, or the proposed cost of overhauling Social Security or the other things that the repugs think if it is out of sight it must be out of mind. Somehow they have the idea these things can be ignored like they are going to be using play money and certainly not needed to figure in the cost of doing business for this bunch of "fiscally conservative" frauds.

This is a point that needs to be hit home every time the repugs try to defend this budget - anyone can play with figures but most voters have to count all bills when it comes to balancing their budget.

[Alpharetta]

2. I see Rove all over this budget. IT'S A TRAP!

Here's Rove's recipe:

1) Propose cuts.
2) Let Democrats and Republicans all complain the cuts used bogus accounting and are in the wrong places.
3) Let FoxNews pretend your BOLD proposal was rejected by GIRLY-MEN afraid to trim government bloat.