Surely there are other folks who are in election-year battles.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20060329-1933-congress-budget.htmlHouse budgeteers drop Bush's proposed cuts to Medicare
The $2.8 trillion plan approved by the Budget Committee late Wednesday on a party-line 22-17 vote omits Bush's cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, crop subsidies and other politically sensitive programs.
The GOP plan, written by Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, for the 2007 budget year beginning Oct. 1, adopts Bush's $873 billion cap on agency budgets renewed by Congress each year. But it also assumes just $50 billion for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, less than half the expected spending for military operations in those countries for the current year.
...
The plan endorses Bush's call for a 7 percent increase in the core defense budget – which doesn't include Iraq war costs – for next year. That increase comes at the expense of domestic programs like education, health research and grants to local governments and relief agencies.
The plan also assumes $226 billion in additional tax cuts over five years, more than half of which would go for extending Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, most of which are set to expire in 2010. But the committee didn't take the necessary steps under Congress' arcane budget process to facilitate speedy action on a tax bill.
The article goes on to quote Nussle touting the tax cuts as a spur to our booming economy. :eyes:
This budget will produce a deficit of $348 billion in 2007 alone. It doesn't account for the costs of the war in Iraq after 2007 and it doesn't shield middle-class workers from the alternative minimum tax. In addition, while basically giving the defense department another blank check, it limits emergency spending for domestic disasters to $4.3 billion.
Education is cut by 7 percent, roughly $5 billion. Probably the most telling is how this budget deals with veterans benefits. After a small increase next year, Nussle's plan would have cut the budget for veterans medical care below current levels through the rest of the decade. (Estimated to be a $10 billion cut in veterans benefits.) When Democrats brought this to light, republicans quickly passed an amendment which added $4 billion over five years back into that fund (but does nothing to stop the cuts after that mark).
Of course, none of this is -- as of yet -- a done deal. And, as we all know, such budget resolutions are merely a blueprint as to how funds should be spent, not a be-all, end-all of where the money actually goes. What's important here is the fact that the GOP is giving Nussle all the credit on this one. We should say "thank you" to the GOP and start spreading the truth about Nussle's proposed budget far and wide:
Nussle's plan would cut veterans benefits, while increasing funds which would continue the war in Iraq and other offensive efforts. Nussle's plan would cut billions from education, forcing even more low- to middle-income students to view the military as their only option for higher education. In short, the values reflected by Jim Nussle are not Iowa's values. He is not the man we want to lead our state.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
