The proposed budget has predictably come under intense fire from congressional Democrats complaining that Bush's fiscal policies eliminated the budget surplus that he inherited from President Clinton. Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, called the president's budget irresponsible and noted that President Bush was also in office when the federal budget broke the $2 trillion mark in 2002. Edwards criticized Bush's failure to include all the costs associated with the war in Iraq and for accounting methods that failed to take into account probable relief from the alternative minimum tax.
According to the White House, the president's plan balances the budget in 2012, if Bush's policies stay in effect with the next president. The White House's overview of the budget's provisions says that the president's plan for fiscal year 2009 focuses on national security and the promotion of economic growth while cutting unnecessary government spending.
An ongoing criticism of Bush's proposed annual budgets concerns accounting for the war in Iraq. Much of the funding for the Iraq war has come in the form of supplemental legislation, meaning that the true costs of the war are not reflected in the president's annual budget. Critics of the war often cite its costs to the national economy and accuse the Bush administration of mortgaging the country's future to pay for the ongoing conflict. In a new backgrounder released today for the Council on Foreign Relations, an independent Washington think tank, assistant editor Lee Hudson Teslik writes that collateral economic consequences resulting from Iraq war spending include increasing foreign debt, an unstable global oil market, and uncertainty in the realm of international relations.
One thing is certain: Bush's proposed fiscal year 2009 budget will provide plenty of ammunition for members of congress facing reelection this year, not to mention the host of candidates still in the hunt for the White House. Record federal spending that favors the defense sector at the expense of congressional pet projects and wasteful government programs will likely stoke conflict in an election that could see the Democratic party retain control of both houses of congress and win the presidency.
Published by AC Writer
I have very diverse interests and never seem to know what's going to hold my attention at any given time. View profile
- 9-11 Five Years Later and the War in IraqKey points for the last five years since 9-11 and the onset of the war in Iraq. Has anything changed? You decide. This is based on historical facts, with my opinion added. You can agree or disagree, but nothing ch...
- The Powerful Eat the Young ; A Few Brief Comments on the War in IraqThere is a difference between a real understanding of history and the right wing "talking-points" version of history. Imagine if "the other side" led us into the war in Iraq. Where might you stand on the issue then?
Congress Should Suspend NASA Until the War in Iraq is OverI propose that we push our Congressional leaders to move to suspend NASA completely until the war in Iraq is over.
September Report on Progress on the War in IraqThe September report on how well or how weakly the USA is doing its job in Iraq is a hot topic for the whole country.- The War in Iraq was a Horrible MistakeThe war in Iraq was a horrible tragic mistake that has cost this country billions of dollars and thousands of young Americans lives and even more Iraqis lives. It is a war we can not win and we should get out of there...
- Bush Unveils New Immigrant Plan: Reestablishing Slavery
- Personal Stories About President Bush
- Social Security Reform - President Bush: Redistribute If You Want to Privatize!
- Omaha Nebraska Protests the War in Iraq
- Book Review: "The Last True Story I'll Ever Tell: An Accidental Soldier's Account...
- Center For Public Integrity: The Lies that Led to Bush's War in Iraq
- Presidential Candidate Congressman Dennis Kucinich Renews Call to End the War in Iraq
