Bush's Fiscal 2008 Budget

[Jason Tate]

U.S. President George W. Bush will lay out a $2.9 trillion budget for fiscal year 2008 on Monday that also includes projections for spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through 2009. Below are some details of the spending plan that were previewed by U.S. officials and in media reports.

* Bush will seek $100 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars for the rest of fiscal year 2007 and more than $145 billion for fiscal year 2008. The budget also will project $50 billion in war costs for 2009 but none beyond that.

* The war request for 2008 will include $5.6 billion to fund Bush's proposal to send an extra 21,500 troops to Iraq.

* The 2008 budget would boost the regular Pentagon budget by 10.5 percent to $481 billion, according to a U.S. official who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting Bush's announcement.

[Broken Parachute]

I'm only really just starting to get interested in politics, so this is like giberish to me. Is this good or bad (the information you posted)?

[Jason Tate]

I'm only really just starting to get interested in politics, so this is like giberish to me. Is this good or bad (the information you posted)?
At the moment - just information. It can be taken either way I suppose.

Seeing as I personally don't agree with the escalation, I think the 5.6 billion should be used elsewhere.

[music3chick]

At the moment - just information. It can be taken either way I suppose.

Seeing as I personally don't agree with the escalation, I think the 5.6 billion should be used elsewhere.

I agree. I really don't want more troops to be sent overseas.

[thatwasamoment]

At the moment - just information. It can be taken either way I suppose.

Seeing as I personally don't agree with the escalation, I think the 5.6 billion should be used elsewhere.augmentation, not escalation.

just kidding.

[aminorthreat55]

Hey you know what would be nice? If this year Congress actually passed a budget on time instead of a bunch of CRs.

[Jason Tate]

Business Week: “The budget recommends a $500 million reduction for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8N3NCCG0.htm), which is the principal agency for protecting the health and safety of all Americans. Funding for the agency would total $5.76 billion. Grants to states for bioterrorism preparation would be reduced, and funding remains at current levels for preventing the nation’s leading health problems — heart disease and cancer.”

[Jason Tate]

This morning, the White House sent its $2.9 trillion budget proposal to Congress, requesting “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 (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/4525390.html), although administration officials conceded that the 2008 and 2009 requests could go higher depending on the progress of the war effort.”
According to the Congressional Research Service, total spending on the Iraq war for fiscal years 2001 through 2006 was $318.5 billion (http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf). The Bush budget would bring total proposed spending in Iraq to $683 billion through 2009. Last month, the Los Angeles Times warned the cost of the Iraq war would soon eclipse the total amount spent on the Vietnam war (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-warcost14jan14,1,5493885.story?coll =la-news-politics-national&track=crosspromo):
By the time the Vietnam war ended in 1975, it had become America’s longest war, shadowed the legacies of four presidents, killed 58,000 Americans along with many thousands more Vietnamese, and cost the U.S. more than $660 billion in today’s dollars.
This budget would break that mark, and the spending blueprint does not take into account other costs of the Iraq war, such as future health care costs for injured soldiers.

[NameTaken69]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/05/bush.budget.ap/index.html
"He is seeking $78 billion in savings in the government's big health care programs -- Medicare and Medicaid -- over the next five years."

So $100 billion more for the war, and $80 billion less for health care? sounds like a stupendous plan to me.

[NameTaken69]

Business Week: “The budget recommends a $500 million reduction for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8N3NCCG0.htm), which is the principal agency for protecting the health and safety of all Americans. Funding for the agency would total $5.76 billion. Grants to states for bioterrorism preparation would be reduced, and funding remains at current levels for preventing the nation’s leading health problems — heart disease and cancer.”

I wouldn't expect anything else, makes me pretty upset. It really is sad that they are keeping funding the same or even reducing it for the health problems that kill hundreds of thousands of americans every year.

[Jason Tate]

On Jan. 31, President Bush headed to Wall Street and for the first time, acknowledged that income inequality exists in America: “The fact is that income inequality is real (http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=180256). It has been rising for more than 25 years.” But apparently, he’s not quite ready to do anything about it. Bush’s 2008 budget cuts crucial aid for America’s middle class:
– “$77 billion (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/02/budget.html) in funding cuts for Medicare and Medicaid over the next five years, and $280 billion over the next 10.”
– $223 million (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/washington/04budget.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin) in funding cuts (4 percent decrease from this year’s levels) to the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
– “$4.9 billion (http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=bondsNew s&storyID=2007-02-05T150220Z_01_WAO000057_RTRIDST_0_U SA-BUDGET-LOCAL-URGENT.XML), or 8 percent, cut in education, training, employment and social services” grants.
– $100 million (http://www.cbpp.org/2-5-07bud.pdf) cut for Head Start, which provides child development services to economically disadvantaged children and families.
– “$2.4 billion (http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=bondsNew s&storyID=2007-02-05T150220Z_01_WAO000057_RTRIDST_0_U SA-BUDGET-LOCAL-URGENT.XML) cut in community and regional development grants — which often provide funding for low- and middle-income communities — to $16.5 billion from $18.9 billion.
– $400 million (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/washington/04budget.html) — 18 percent — cut in the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, “which provides $2.2 billion to help people pay heating bills this year.”
– $172 million (http://www.chn.org/pdf/2007/bushbudget08.pdf) — nearly 25 percent — cut in funding for housing for low-income seniors.
While Bush forgot about the middle class in the new budget, he made sure to look out for the wealthy. As the Tax Policy Center notes, “People with incomes of more than $1 million would get tax cuts averaging $162,000 a year (http://www.cbpp.org/2-5-07bud.pdf) (in 2012 dollars) in perpetuity.”

[dw1003]

The most frustrating thing about his proposed budget is that he claims we'll have a surplus of $61 Billion by 2012... I guess we'll pay down the deficit by starving our middle class and making sure they can't afford health care... and his budget assumes that we'll no longer be spending money on Iraq in 2009... what a fucking asshole, he lies us into this mess and tries to lie his way out...

[Jason Tate]

n a letter to Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND), the Congressional Budget Office reports that the war in Iraq has so far cost U.S. taxpayers $351 billion. The total amount, approved and requested, by the Bush administration is $532 billion. The letter attempts to answer how much more Iraq will cost over the next decade (read it here (http://www.budget.senate.gov/democratic/documents/2007/CBOWarCostLettertoConrad020707.pdf) ). To answer that question, the CBO laid out two possible scenarios, and the costs of the respective plans:
First, under a “stay the course” scenario with a gradual drawdown that leaves 75,000 soldiers overseas in 2013 and each year thereafter, the cost would be $919 billion for the next ten years.
The second scenario proposes a faster drawdown, leaving only 30,000 military personnel overseas over the 2010–2017 period, although not necessarily in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cost of that plan would be $472 billion for the next ten years.
In other words, phased withdrawal from Iraq would save $447 billion over the next decade.
The CBO acknowledges a great amount of uncertainty in its calculations. “The President has announced a plan to increase the number of military personnel deployed to Iraq, but it is not clear how many troops will be involved, how long the size of deployed forces will remain elevated, or what the nature of the United States’ long-term military commitment in Iraq and elsewhere will be.”
As the letter makes clear, hundreds of billions of dollars hang in the balance depending on the answers to those questions.

[Love As Arson]

Imagine how much money would be saved if we were to simply leave, as we have the ability to do.