Obama Recovery Program Includes $300 Billion In Tax Cuts

[timwakefield 69]

Oh wait, that's a good thing. Yaaaaaaaaayyy! I guess I just assumed that anything Obama did would be backhanded and evil and communist and racist against whites. He's probably saving that stuff up for his 2nd term amirite? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/us/polit...tml?_r=1&hp

WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama plans to include about $300 billion in tax cuts for workers and businesses in his economic recovery program, advisers said Sunday, as his team seeks to win over Congressional skeptics worried that he was too focused on government spending.The legislation Mr. Obama is developing with Congressional Democrats will devote about 40 percent of the cost to tax cuts, including his centerpiece campaign promise to provide credits up to $500 for most workers, costing roughly $150 billion. The package will also include more than $100 billion in tax incentives for businesses to create jobs and invest in equipment or factories.The overall economic package, of $675 billion to $775 billion, is taking shape as Mr. Obama arrived in Washington and planned to begin trying to build support in Congress and among the broader public for his approach to stimulating the economy. Mr. Obama, who flew to the capital on Sunday to join his family in a hotel suite while awaiting his inauguration, planned to meet with Congressional leaders on Monday and deliver a speech on Thursday laying the ground for his emerging economic program.Although some tax cuts were always expected to be included in Mr. Obama’s economic package, his team disclosed the scope and some details of the plans on Sunday at a time when Republicans have begun voicing criticism of what they describe as an open-checkbook approach to spending. By focusing more attention on the tax cuts in the plan, Obama aides hope to frame it as a balanced, pragmatic approach.Mr. Obama will use his public events this week to promise what one adviser called “radical reforms” to impose more control over the regular federal budget down the road. Among other areas, the president-elect will focus on changing Pentagon contracting and aid to corporate America, advisers said. He will also designate a chief performance officer and a chief technology officer on Wednesday to help make government more efficient, they said.Still, Democratic leaders in Congress acknowledged that the economic package would not be ready for Mr. Obama’s signature immediately after his inauguration on Jan. 20, as they once hoped.“It’s going to be very difficult to get the package put together that early so that it can have sufficient time to be reviewed, and then sufficient time to be debated and passed,” Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the House majority leader, said on “Fox News Sunday.”Mr. Hoyer said a more likely goal would be mid-February before Congress leaves on a Presidents’ Day recess. “We certainly want to see this package passed through the House of Representatives no later than the end of this month, get it over to the Senate, and have it to the president before we break for the presidential break,” Mr. Hoyer said.Congressional Republicans continued to press for more public hearings and study, and some of their leaders threw out their own ideas for what should be in the plan. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, proposed Sunday that any money distributed to the states be provided as loans rather than outright grants.“Nobody thinks we ought to be spending this money on things like mob museums and waterslides,” Mr. McConnell said on “This Week” on ABC. “And if the money were lent rather than just granted, states would I think spend it wisely, and the states that didn’t need it at all wouldn’t take any.”Mr. McConnell said Republicans were more likely to favor tax relief and tax credits as part of the economic measure and said Congress should consider reducing the 25 percent income tax rate to 15 percent.Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House speaker, said Congress would also take on the issue of waste in federal agencies, though she was not ready to disclose details of her approach. “We will have reforms related to waste, fraud and abuse,” she said in an interview.Other Congressional officials said House Democrats would consider a plan this week requiring a new audit of all federal agencies and mandating Congressional hearings whenever inspectors general identify potential waste or fraud.Mr. Obama’s team argued Sunday that the short-term cost of its economic plan was not a priority in the face of the dire problems in the economy. “There is no short run, other than keeping the economy from absolutely tanking. That’s the only short run,” Vice President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. said on “This Week.” He added, “We’ve got to begin to stem this bleeding here, and begin to stop the loss of jobs and the creation of jobs.”The economic package under consideration by the president-elect and his Congressional allies would commit $675 billion to $775 billion over two years. If the tax cuts represent 40 percent of that, as Mr. Obama’s advisers said Sunday, that would mean about $270 billion to $310 billion.About half of that would go to workers under what Mr. Obama during his campaign called the Making Work Pay credit, worth up to $500 for individuals and $1,000 for families. The Obama campaign estimated that about 150 million Americans making less than $200,000 would qualify, including those who make too little to pay federal income taxes but would receive a check that would offset Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes.Mr. Obama’s advisers said Sunday that they were searching for a way to get that credit into Americans’ pockets quickly to help stimulate spending, but would not duplicate the rebate checks sent last year as part of an economic package signed by President Bush. Instead, they said, they were discussing making the credit retroactive to the 2008 tax year and adjusting withholding formulas so paychecks would start reflecting that right away.Mr. Obama’s advisers said they were still discussing with Congressional leaders the precise plan for phasing out the credit for wealthier Americans. They said no tax increases were included in the plan because it was focused on measures that create jobs. Obama aides have signaled that they will wait to let Mr. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans expire in 2010, rather than try to repeal them sooner.Likewise, other tax proposals Mr. Obama made in the campaign are not in the economic package because they are not aimed directly at job creation. Aides said the president-elect might return to those later on, possibly as early as the annual budget proposal he is to present in February.“There are lots of priorities that are not included here, not because they are any less important in the long run but because we really want to stick to the principle that this is an economic recovery plan,” one adviser said.To encourage businesses to expand their work forces and operations, Mr. Obama wants a tax credit for each job created. During the campaign, he proposed $3,000 for each job. Advisers said he was now also trying to figure out a way to give incentives to businesses to resist cutting jobs, as so many have been doing.The economic plan will also include other tax breaks intended to stir capital investment. The stimulus package Mr. Bush signed last year included a provision generally allowing businesses immediate depreciation of half of their spending in 2008 on new equipment, rather than spreading out that depreciation over years, reducing their immediate tax burdens. Mr. Obama’s advisers said they were planning to build on that, either by extending it to investment in 2009 and 2010 or through some other mechanism.The Obama plan would also allow businesses to apply net operating losses from last year to offset tax liabilities from prior years, enabling them to claim refunds from the government now in hopes of encouraging capital investment, much as was done in a 2002 economic stimulus plan.

[Sheiky 0]

Yeah but how many tax cuts are the richest .01% of the American population going to get? Not many as far as I can see. Damn Communist.

[akoff 0]

I am all for tax cuts. However I don't believe they are the solution. IMO we need address the items that got us here, overspending being the key. We don't need tac cuts to to stimulate the economy we need to stop spending money like a drunken sailor!!If we live and act in a fiscal responcible manor things will take care of themselves. If the government does little they will be sorted out sooner....if the government does more it will just take longer and end up costing us more.Remember overspending is what got us here!!!!!

[Sheiky 0]

Explain how overspending is what got us here?I think it's a right wing myth that all our problems magically disappear when we stop 'wasteful' government spending. It seems to me to be a belief based more on mantra and ideology more than reality. A belief perpetuated by right-wingers who want to create the image that the US federal government steals you money then randomly burns it, rallying against this kind of government is easy and grabs votes, but I don't think it's realistic. All this money that they're spending domestically, it's being use for something. It's being invested in infrastructure and health care, for social security and research and development, for those earmarks that benefit state communities. I agree that America should look towards achieving a budget surplus and that the current amount of government debt is not healthy and that imo defence spending should be cut. But all too often it's just a pop culture idea perpetuated by people like Ronald Reagan, whom I might had oversaw a massive increase in national debt despite just as Bush has done, despite the promises.

[akoff 0]

Explain how overspending is what got us here?I think it's a right wing myth that all our problems magically disappear when we stop 'wasteful' government spending. It seems to me to be a belief based more on mantra and ideology more than reality. A belief perpetuated by right-wingers who want to create the image that the US federal government steals you money then randomly burns it, rallying against this kind of government is easy and grabs votes, but I don't think it's realistic. All this money that they're spending domestically, it's being use for something. It's being invested in infrastructure and health care, for social security and research and development, for those earmarks that benefit state communities. I agree that America should look towards achieving a budget surplus and that the current amount of government debt is not healthy and that imo defence spending should be cut. But all too often it's just a pop culture idea perpetuated by people like Ronald Reagan, whom I might had oversaw a massive increase in national debt despite just as Bush has done, despite the promises.

We have people that are living on credit cards. There are many making 50 - 70k and buying houses worth 400k and up. People that are spending every $$ they make and refinancing for cash to continue to spend. Companies that are leveraged out of their league based on future growth but with no cash balance to offset even a mildly off year....these are just a few things. I am very good with risk managment but people have lost their minds...I hve a friend who made approx. 400k or so in 3 or 4 years buying and selling property in AZ. He dumped all his profits into two new rawland properties, he paid top $$ for the land, built 750k houses on them and....bam the market burst. He lost the 400k he was ahead and another 350k to finally just get rid of them...he was follish. He thought everything would go forever. Wrong, he almost lost hispersonal house over it but he did manage to avoid that.I know another guy who is in the process of losing everything he has due to being over extended, he has good credit but the banks don't have the cash to lend him. When he went to tap his line of credit they told him it was put on hold...he is heading to auction soon.I have a guy that works for me. He makes about 80k maybe a little more depending on the year. He has a new house, new car, new everything...and just requested a raise becuase he can't afford all the stuff he has bought...This was after he got 3.5 percent annual raise in the fall.Our government collects whatever a Brazzilion $$ per yer in tax and they always manage to spend more...stop. Just cut the spending. The worst caretaker in history of your money is the government...talk about a dime holding up a $$. That is what they do. They find a way to spend 1 million to create 500k...that is great math. It is always the same..."this time it is going to be different" "we are going to watch this close" Blah blah it doesn't work.Folks you / we need to spend what we can afford, the government needs to spend less not more, we need to create real industries not prop up failed ones, we need to let tough times find a level ground and rebuild...i am not screaming for NO government. I am just sayign new, more bigger government will make things worse not better.Remember we are talking about the long term here. I will tell you that many of the problems we have right now are still a result of the new deal...but whatever. I need to go make some money now.

[hblask 1]

So he's going to increase spending AND cut taxes AND balance the budget? Wow, he is a miracle worker isn't he, the next messiah!Seriously, are people stupid enough to believe this crap?

All this money that they're spending domestically, it's being use for something. It's being invested in infrastructure and health care, for social security and research and development, for those earmarks that benefit state communities.

Question: If the government spends $100 billion dollars to hire teams to dig holes and then fill them back in, is that good for the economy or bad for the economy?This isn't a frivolous question; your answer to this question is a good indicator on your understanding of economics.

[akoff 0]

I think it's a right wing myth that all our problems magically disappear when we stop 'wasteful' government spending. It seems to me to be a belief based more on mantra and ideology more than reality. A belief perpetuated by right-wingers who want to create the image that the US federal government steals you money then randomly burns it, rallying against this kind of government is easy and grabs votes, but I don't think it's realistic. All this money that they're spending domestically, it's being use for something. It's being invested in infrastructure and health care, for social security and research and development, for those earmarks that benefit state communities.

A few examples belowA real war on government waste could easily save over $100 billion annually without harming the legitimate operations and benefits of government programs. As a first step, lawmakers should address the 10 following examples of egregious waste.1. The Missing $25 BillionBuried in the Department of the Treasury’s 2003 Financial Report of the United States Government is a short section titled “Unreconciled Transactions Affecting the Change in Net Position,” which explains that these unreconciled transactions totaled $24.5 billion in 2003.[2]The unreconciled transactions are funds for which auditors cannot account: The government knows that $25 billion was spent by someone, somewhere, on something, but auditors do not know who spent it, where it was spent, or on what it was spent. Blaming these unreconciled transactions on the failure of federal agencies to report their expenditures adequately, the Treasury report con­cludes that locating the money is “a priority.”The unreconciled $25 billion could have funded the entire Department of Justice for an entire year.2. Unused Flight Tickets Totaling $100 MillionA recent audit revealed that between 1997 and 2003, the Defense Department purchased and then left unused approximately 270,000 commercial airline tickets at a total cost of $100 million. Even worse, the Pentagon never bothered to get a refund for these fully refundable tickets. The GAO blamed a system that relied on department personnel to notify the travel office when purchased tickets went unused.[3]Auditors also found 27,000 transactions between 2001 and 2002 in which the Pentagon paid twice for the same ticket. The department would purchase the ticket directly and then inex­plicably reimburse the employee for the cost of the ticket. (In one case, an employee who allegedly made seven false claims for airline tickets professed not to have noticed that $9,700 was deposited into his/her account). These additional transactions cost taxpayers $8 million.This $108 million could have purchased seven Blackhawk helicopters, 17 M1 Abrams tanks, or a large supply of additional body armor for U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.3. Embezzled Funds at the Department of AgricultureFederal employee credit card programs were designed to save money. Rather than weaving through a lengthy procurement process to acquire basic supplies, federal employees could purchase job-related products with credit cards that would be paid by their agency. What began as a smart way to streamline government has since been corrupted by some federal employees who have abused the public trust.A recent audit revealed that employees of the Department of Agriculture (USDA) diverted mil­lions of dollars to personal purchases through their government-issued credit cards. Sampling 300 employees’ purchases over six months, investigators estimated that 15 percent abused their government credit cards at a cost of $5.8 million. Taxpayer-funded purchases included Ozzy Osbourne concert tickets, tattoos, lingerie, bartender school tuition, car payments, and cash advances.The USDA has pledged a thorough investigation, but it will have a huge task: 55,000 USDA credit cards are in circulation, including 1,549 that are still held by people who no longer work at the USDA.[4]4. Credit Card Abuse at the Department of DefenseThe Defense Department has uncovered its own credit card scandal. Over one recent 18-month period, Air Force and Navy personnel used govern­ment-funded credit cards to charge at least $102,400 for admission to entertainment events, $48,250 for gambling, $69,300 for cruises, and $73,950 for exotic dance clubs and prostitutes.[5]5. Medicare OverspendingMedicare wastes more money than any other federal program, yet its strong public support leaves lawmakers hesitant to address program effi­ciencies, which cost taxpayers and Medicare recip­ients billions of dollars annually.For example, Medicare pays as much as eight times what other federal agencies pay for the same drugs and medical supplies.[6] The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently com­pared the prices paid by Medicare and the Depart­ment of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care program for 16 types of medical equipment and supplies, which account for one-quarter of Medicare’s equip­ment and supplies purchases. The evidence showed that Medicare paid an average of more than double what the VA paid for the same items. The largest difference was for saline solution, with Medicare paying $8.26 per liter compared to the $1.02 paid by the VA.[7] (See Table 1.)These higher prices not only cost the program more money, but also take more money out of the pockets of Medicare beneficiaries. In 2002, senior citizens’ co-payments accounted for 20 percent of the $9.4 billion in allowed claims for medical equipment and supplies.[8] Higher prices mean higher co-payments.Medicare also overpays for drugs. In 2000, Medicare’s payments for 24 leading drugs were $1.9 billion higher than they would have been under the prices paid by the VA or other federal agencies. Although Medicare is supposed to pay wholesale prices for drugs, it relies on drug manu­facturers to define the prices, and manufacturers have strong incentives to inflate their prices.[9]Nor are inflated prices for drugs and supplies the most expensive examples of Medicare’s inefficien­cies. Basic payment errors—the results of deliber­ate fraud and administrative errors—cost $12.3 billion annually. As much as $7 billion owed to the program has gone uncollected or has been written off.[10] Finally, while Medicare contracts claims pro­cessing and administration to several private com­panies, 19 cases of contractor fraud have been settled in recent years, with a maximum settlement of $76 million.[11]Putting it all together, Medicare reform could save taxpayers and program beneficiaries $20 bil­lion to $30 billion annually without reducing ben­efits. That would be enough to fund a $3,000 refundable health care tax credit for nearly 10 mil­lion uninsured low-income households.6. Funding Fictitious Colleges and StudentsIn 2002, the Department of Education received an application to certify the student loan participa­tion of the Y’Hica Institute in London, England. After approving the certification, the department received and approved student loan applications from three Y’Hica students and disbursed $55,000.The Education Department administrators over­looked one problem: Neither the Y’Hica Institute nor the three students who received the $55,000 existed. The fictitious college and students were created (on paper) by congressional investigators to test the Department of Education’s verification pro­cedures. All of the documents were faked, right down to naming one of the fictional loan student applicants “Susan M. Collins,” after the Senator requesting the investigation.[12]Such carelessness helps to explain why federal student loan programs routinely receive poor man­agement reviews from government auditors. At last count, $21.8 billion worth of student loans are in default, and too many cases of fraud are left undetec­ted.[13] Tracking students across federal programs, verifying loan application data with IRS income data, and implementing controls to prevent the dis­bursement of loans to fraudulent applicants could save taxpayers billions of dollars.7. Manipulating Data to Encourage SpendingThe Army Corps of Engineers spends $5 billion annually constructing dams and other water projects. Yet, in a massive conflict of interest, it is also charged with evaluating the science and eco­nomics of each proposed water project. The Corps’ “strategic vision” calls on managers to increase their budgets as rapidly as possible, which requires approving as many proposed projects as possible.[14] Consequently, the Corps has repeatedly been accused of deliberately manipulating its economic studies to justify unworthy projects.Investigations by the GAO, The Washington Post, and several private organizations have found that Corps studies routinely contain dozens of basic arithmetic errors, computer errors, and ridiculous economic assumptions that artificially inflate the benefits of water projects by as much as 300 per­cent.[15] In one case, a study’s authors inflated a project’s benefits by using a 2.5 percent interest rate that dated back to 1954. In many cases in which the Corps calculated that a project would be a net benefit, arithmetic corrections revealed that the costs would be many times greater than the bene­fits.[16] By that point, of course, the unnecessary and wasteful project is often underway and cannot be stopped.These errors appear to reflect more deception than sloppiness. A Washington Post investigation uncovered managers ordering analysts to “get cre­ative,” to “look for ways to get to yes as fast as pos­sible,” and “not to take no for an answer.” After a public outcry, in 2002, the Corps suspended work on 150 projects to review the economics used to justify them.[17] However, given the combination of Congress’s thirst for pork-barrel projects and the Corps’ built-in incentives to approve projects that will increase its budget, real reforms seem unlikely.8. State Abuse of Medicaid Funding FormulasSignificant waste, fraud, and abuse pervade Medicaid, which provides health services to 44 million low-income Americans. While states run their own Medicaid programs, the federal govern­ment reimburses an average of 57 percent of each state’s costs.This system gives states an incentive to overre­port their Medicaid expenditures in order to receive larger federal reimbursements. Not sur­prisingly, the GAO has identified state schemes that shift money between state accounts to create an illusion of higher Medicaid expenditures. Simi­larly, some states have spent their federal Medicaid dollars on non-Medicaid purposes. Tight state budgets like those experienced by most states today have increased the pressure to use such deceptive tactics.The GAO and the HHS Inspector General have also uncovered some states’ practice of recovering improper payments, retaining the funds, and then spending them on unrelated programs—a practice that costs the federal government well over $2 bil­lion per year. Congress could enact legislation to prohibit these actions more effectively.Minor reforms enacted by HHS in 2001 and 2002 are expected to save Medicaid $70 billion over the next decade. A small sample of financing schemes uncovered in a few states suggests that, if Congress acts, even larger savings are available.[18]9. Earned Income Tax Credit OverpaymentsThe earned income tax credit (EITC) provides $31 billion in refundable tax credits to 19 million low-income families. The IRS estimates that $8.5 billion to $9.9 billion of this amount—nearly one-third—is wasted in overpayments.The complexity of the EITC law leads to many of these mistakes. Calculating the credits is more complex than calculating regular income taxes. While the credit amount depends on the number of children in a household, the tax code does not clearly define how a child qualifies for the credit. In addition, fraud and underreporting of income are common, and the IRS lacks the resources to verify the qualifications of all EITC claimants.Efforts are being made to address this prob­lem, but Congress can do more by requiring bet­ter verification of incomes and by clearly defining the standards by which a child qualifies for the EITC.[19]10. Redundancy Piled on RedundancyGovernment’s layering of new programs on top of old ones inherently creates duplication. Having sev­eral agencies perform similar duties is wasteful and confuses program beneficiaries who must navigate each program’s distinct rules and requirements.Some overlap is inevitable because some agen­cies are defined by whom they serve (e.g., veterans, Native Americans, urbanites, and rural families), while others are defined by what they provide (e.g., housing, education, health care, and economic development). When these agencies’ constituencies overlap, each relevant agency will often have its own program. With 342 separate economic devel­opment programs, the federal government needs to make consolidation a priority.Consolidating duplicative programs will save money and improve government service. In addi­tion to those programs that should be eliminated completely, Congress should consolidate the fol­lowing sets of programs:

• 342 economic development programs;
• 130 programs serving the disabled;
• 130 programs serving at-risk youth;
• 90 early childhood development programs;
• 75 programs funding international education, cultural, and training exchange activities;
• 72 federal programs dedicated to assuring safe water;
• 50 homeless assistance programs;
• 45 federal agencies conducting federal crimi­nal investigations;
• 40 separate employment and training pro­grams;
• 28 rural development programs;
• 27 teen pregnancy programs;
• 26 small, extraneous K–12 school grant pro­grams;
• 23 agencies providing aid to the former Soviet republics;
• 19 programs fighting substance abuse;
• 17 rural water and waste-water programs in eight agencies;
• 17 trade agencies monitoring 400 interna­tional trade agreements;
• 12 food safety agencies;
• 11 principal statistics agencies; and
• Four overlapping land management agencies.[20]

ConclusionLawmakers have an opportunity to take a strong stand for efficient government and spending restraint. Reforming wasteful programs will build essential momentum for the larger reforms that are needed to bring the budget under control.

[akoff 0]

want moreI. AGRICULTUREThe Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee was one of the few subcommittees that did not get reorganized. This meant that pork-hungry appropriators knew exactly where to add their pet projects. Usually when seeking information, CAGW gets the cold shoulder from appropriators. This year, the Agricultural Research Service was the spoiler, refusing to release public budget documents. Total agriculture pork in fiscal 2006 was $584 million, or 60 percent more than the fiscal 2005 total of $365 million. The number of projects decreased by 2 percent, from 512 to 502.$33,907,000 added by the Senate for projects in the state of Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), including: $10,000,000 for the Mississippi Conservation Initiative; $5,766,000 for the Wildlife Habitat Management Institute; $1,433,000 for curriculum development at Mississippi Valley State University; $1,389,000 for the Delta Conservation Demonstration Center in Washington County; $936,000 for advanced spatial technologies; $517,000 for aquaculture research; $300,000 for the National Center for Natural Products; $180,000 for natural products research; and $50,000 for cotton ginning research.$33,360,000 for projects in the state of Senate appropriator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), including: $25,000,000 for rural and native villages; $1,300,000 for berry research; $1,099,000 for alternative salmon products; $500,000 for fruit and berry crop trials for rural villages; $443,000 for new crop opportunities; $331,000 for food preparation and marketing research; $300,000 for commercialization of native plant materials; $250,000 for ethnobotany research; $166,000 for salmon quality standards; and $75,000 for seafood waste research.$17,361,000 for projects in the state of Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) and in the district of House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member David Obey (D-Wis.), including: $8,000,000 for the Nutrient Management Laboratory; $817,000 for urban horticulture; $600,000 for the Babcock Institute; $260,000 for grazing research; $250,000 for cereal crops research; and $30,000 for Great Lakes aquaculture.$14,085,000 for projects in the state of Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Robert Bennett (R-Utah), including: $5,000,000 for the Utah Conservation Initiative; $3,000,000 for the Washington Fields Project; $900,000 for botanical research; $545,000 for advanced computing research and education; and $300,000 for the Oquirrh Institute. According to the Institute’s website, “The Oquirrh Institute was founded in Salt Lake City, Utah, during the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. The Institute's mission is to shine early light on public policy dilemmas and establish innovative solutions. The Oquirrh Institute is currently involved in four areas of concentration: Moving to Competency-Measured Education, Improving Environmental Management, Advancing Health Information and Research and Enhancing Governance Through Technology.” According to USDA testimony, “The principal researchers have not yet determined a completion date on this project.” A total of $500 has been raised from corporations and foundations. Taxpayers have “contributed” $550,000 to Oquirrh since 2004.$13,274,000 added by the Senate for projects in the state of Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee member Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), including: $3,000,000 for the Animal Waste Management Research Laboratory; $843,000 for health education leadership; $760,000 for new crop opportunities; $645,000 for advanced genetic technologies research; $516,000 for Western Kentucky University ($396,000 to monitor the water quality and biological diversity of the Green River Watershed and $120,000 for waste management research); and $120,000 for improved forage and livestock production at Sen. McConnell’s alma mater, the University of Kentucky.$10,995,000 added by the Senate for projects in the state of Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), including: $4,500,000 for the Geographic Information System Center of Excellence at West Virginia University; $2,045,000 for the Appalachian Fruit Laboratory in Kearneysville; $860,000 for the Appalachian Small Farmer Outreach Program; $750,000 for multiflora rose control; $690,000 for agriculture waste utilization research; $180,000 for turfgrass research; $160,000 for poultry litter composting; and $160,000 for feed efficiency research. According to USDA testimony, the feed efficiency project was supposed to be completed in 2005, and the research was being conducted at the West Virginia University Performance Bull Testing Facility in Wardensville. Now, that’s appropriate!$6,435,000 for wood utilization research in Alaska, Idaho, Maine, Mich., Minn., Miss., N.C., Ore., Tenn., Wash., and W.Va. Since 1985, $86 million has been sapped from the taxpayers for this purpose.$4,200,000 for shrimp aquaculture research in Ariz., Hawaii, La., Mass., Miss., S.C., and Texas. According to USDA testimony, “The goal of this program is to develop a sustainable domestic shrimp farming industry in the United States.” The timeline for this program appears to be indefinite. Since 1985, $65.7 million has been appropriated for this research.$2,100,000 for the viticulture consortium in California, New York, and Pennsylvania. According to USDA testimony, “The original goal of this research was to maintain or enhance the competitiveness of the United States viticulture and wine industry in the global market.”$500,000 for apple fire blight research in Michigan and New York. According to USDA testimony in March 2005, “The anticipated date of completion of the original objectives was 2000, however, the original objectives have not been accomplished. The principal investigators estimate that an additional five years will be needed to accomplish the original objectives. The estimated completion date is 2005.” Since 1997, $4.2 million has been appropriated for this research. This project has already taken two bites of the taxpayers’ apple, and that’s more than enough.$365,000 added by the Senate for the Center for Rural Studies in the state of Senate appropriator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). According to USDA testimony, “The original goal was to create a database and analytical capability for rural development programming in Vermont.” However, USDA also testified that, “No formal evaluation of this project has been conducted.” Oops! Since 1992, $2 million has been appropriated for this research.$359,000 for organic cropping research in Washington. There is no documentation of any non-federal or private funds. According to a 2004 survey by the Organic Trade Association, “U.S. organic food sales have grown between 17 and 21 percent each year since 1997, to nearly triple in sales, while total U.S. food sales over this time period have grown in the range of only 2 to 4 percent a year. According to the findings, organic food sales now represent approximately 2 percent of U.S. food sales.”$352,000 for floriculture research in the state of Senate appropriator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). The USDA has estimated that out-of-state sales of Hawaiian floriculture reached $97 million in 2003. According to USDA officials, “The principal researchers have not determined a completion date for the work on this project.” Since 1989, $5 million has been appropriated for this research.$273,000 added by the House for urban market development in New York. According to USDA testimony, Cornell University proposes “to implement ‘Garden Mosaics,’ a community gardens program through which youth, educators, and adult gardeners conduct investigations of food-growing practices drawn from a diversity of cultures, and explore the science principles underlying these practices.” Since 2003, $620,000 has been appropriated for this project.$244,000 added by the Senate for range improvement research in the state of Senate appropriator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.). According to USDA testimony, “The focus of the project is the livestock grazing industry in New Mexico…The principal researchers anticipate the work to be completed in 2005.” Apparently, this research will be continuing until the cows come home.$234,000 for the National Wild Turkey Federation. According to the organization’s website, “In 1973, the National Wild Turkey Federation was founded in Fredericksburg, Va. At that time, there were an estimated 1.3 million wild turkeys and 1.5 million turkey hunters. Shortly after its founding, the NWTF moved to Edgefield, S.C., where it is headquartered today. Thanks to the work of federal, state and provincial wildlife agencies and the NWTF's many volunteers and partners, there are now close to 7 million wild turkeys and nearly 3 million turkey hunters.” According to USDA testimony, “The project builds on the Federation’s longstanding public education program that reaches approximately 250,000 citizens annually. The project goal, to be accomplished by targeting nontraditional audiences, is to increase participation by these groups in outdoor activities, including, hunting, and thereby contributing to a more healthy lifestyle for the individuals…”$211,000 for tropical aquaculture in Florida. According to USDA testimony, “The original goal of the research project was to improve culture and transportation techniques for the commercial tropical aquaculture industry in Florida. Accomplishments include: a previously undomesticated high-value ornamental fish has recently been bred in captivity…” Since 2000, $1.2 million has been appropriated for this research.$179,000 added by the House for hydroponic tomato production research in the districts of House appropriator Ralph Regula (R-Ohio) and House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee member Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio). According to USDA testimony, “The anticipated completion date for this research was fiscal year 2002; the original objectives were met. The anticipated completion date for the new objectives for this project initiated in 2003 is fiscal 2005. No additional or related objectives have been identified.” Since 1998, $1.2 million has been appropriated for this research.

[akoff 0]

and moreEfficient and effective operation of the Department of Defense (DOD) is critical to ensuring the security of our nation and the safety of our troops. While American military forces fight for peace and democracy in the Middle East, Pentagon officials at home struggle to create a lean, mean, war-fighting machine; but so far, appropriators are winning too many battles. From fiscal 2005 to fiscal 2006, the number of pork-barrel projects jumped 8 percent from 2,606 to 2,822, while the total cost went up 17 percent, from $12.7 billion to $14.9 billion.$591,017,000 added in conference for eight additional C-130J aircraft. A February 2005 Associated Press article noted, “A 2004 report from the office of the inspector general of the Department of Defense rated the J model unsatisfactory and cited deficiencies in, among other things, its defensive systems.”$360,295,000 for projects in the state of Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), including: $22,000,000 for Maui Space Surveillance System operations and research; $21,650,000 for the Hawaii Federal Health Care Network; $17,000,000 for the digitization of DOD manuals; $6,000,000 for the Center of Excellence in Research and Ocean Sciences; $4,000,000 for the Center of Excellence for Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance; $3,400,000 for the Hickam Air Force Base Alternative Fuel Vehicle Program; $2,500,000 for a small business pilot program to re-engineer the DOD vendor payment process; $2,000,000 for small business development and transition; $1,000,000 for methane desalination systems; $500,000 for porous silicon research; and $500,000 for the Hawaii Wireless Interoperability Network.$92,425,000 for projects in the state of Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), including: $17,000,000 for utility repairs ($8,500,00 at Fort Wainwright and $8,500,00 at Eielson Air Force Base); $15,100,000 for Allen Army Airfield upgrades; $12,800,000 for Alaska land mobile radios; $8,500,000 for the Port of Anchorage Intermodal Marine Facility Project; $3,400,000 for the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), which was initially designed to capture energy from the aurora borealis [northern lights], but is now being configured to heat up the ionosphere to improve military communications (CAGW has identified $105.9 million appropriated for HAARP since 1995); $2,000,000 for a track relocation study at Fort Wainwright; and $500,000 for the Arctic Winter Games. According to the winter games website, “The Arctic Winter Games is a high profile circumpolar sport competition for northern and arctic athletes. The Games provide an opportunity to strengthen sport development in the participants’ jurisdictions, to promote the benefits of sport, to build partnerships, and to promote culture and values. The Games celebrate sport, social exchange and cultures. The Games provide an opportunity for the developing athlete to compete in friendly competition while sharing cultural values from northern regions around the world.”$50,720,000 added for projects in the state of Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee member Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House appropriators Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) and Anne Northup (R-Ky.), including: $8,400,000 for the Phalanx SeaRam; $2,800,000 for biometrics signature research; $2,520,000 for the Kentucky National Guard Counterdrug and High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area; and $1,000,000 for crossroad cluster communities at Fort Knox.$32,800,000 added for projects in the state of House appropriators Joseph Knollenberg (R-Mich.) and Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-Mich.), including: $7,000,000 for the Future Tactical Truck System; $7,000,000 for the Modular Causeway System; and $1,000,000 for the Gaming-Technology Software Initiative. $28,950,000 added by the Senate for projects in the state of Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee member Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.): $26,350,000 for a facility restoration plan at the Allegheny Ballistics Lab and $2,600,000 for the West Virginia National Guard for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities. The Allegheny Ballistics Center is located at the Robert C. Byrd Institute for Flexible Manufacturing.$8,270,000 for breath alcohol testing equipment, including $7,270,000 for Breathscan® alcohol detectors and $1,000,000 for autonomous non-invasive alcohol testing.$5,600,000 added by the House for the Gallo Center. According to its website, “The Ernest Gallo Clinic & Research Center (EGCRC) at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) was established in 1980 to study basic neuroscience and the effects of alcohol and drug abuse on the brain.” There is no mention of any defense-related research. Apparently, they will serve no pork before its time.$4,000,000 for the Bayonne Military Ocean Terminal (BMOT). Last year, CAGW noted that BMOT was the new home of Royal Caribbean cruise ships and was used as a location for the film “A Beautiful Mind” and HBO’s television series “Oz.” In 2005, the Bayonne Local Redevelopment Agency, the governing entity of BMOT, bragged that it was “the proud recipient of the New Jersey Planning Officials (NJPO) 2005 ‘Achievement in Planning Award’ and New Jersey Future 2005 ‘Smart Growth Award.’”$4,000,000 added by the House for the Toledo Shipyard Improvement Plan in the district of House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee member Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio). According to The Toledo Blade, the shipyard was scheduled to close on October 31, 2005. The paper noted, “Despite millions of dollars in pledged public aid for modernizations and upgrades, the Toledo Shipyard's operator has indicated that it will pull anchor by the end of October, costing the area about 70 jobs.” Business at the shipyard has been waning over the last 20 years.$2,500,000 for out-of-this-world appropriations in California; $1,500,000 for the Allen Telescope array and $1,000,000 for the Griffith Observatory Planetarium. While the Allen Telescope Array will look for extraterrestrial life, the newly renovated Griffith observatory will showcase American accomplishments in space. There are no exhibits yet planned on how DOD will defend the world against aliens.$1,000,000 for the Waterfree Urinal Conservation Initiative added by Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.). According to a October 20, 2005 CongressDaily article, Rep. Ehlers wrote a letter to House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman C.W. (Bill) Young (R-Fla.) requesting this earmark.$1,000,000 added by the House for the already-closed Philadelphia Navy Yard. At the September 2004 announcement of a $2 billion plan for the Navy Yard, Philadelphia Mayor John Street said, “The Plan builds on the Navy Yard’s history as an industrial site and defines an exciting mix of office, research, commercial, and residential development including a new marina district and extension of the Broad Street Subway to access the Yard as part of a new Philadelphia waterfront neighborhood that will result in as many as 30,000 jobs at the 1,200-acre site. The Navy Master Plan is a centerpiece of the Mayor’s New River City proposal, which calls for coordinated development of the City’s entire 38 miles of waterfront.” $1,000,000 added by the Senate for a competency-based distance education initiative with Western Governors University in the state of Senate appropriator Robert Bennett (R-Utah). This school is a private university that only gained accreditation in 2003. A close examination of their website does not reveal any defense-related missions.$500,000 added in conference for the Translational Genomics Research Institute in the district of House appropriator Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.). According to the Institute’s website, “The vision of the Translational Genomics Research Institute is a world where genomic discoveries can be rapidly translated to the diagnosis and treatment of disease in a manner tailored to the individual.” There is no mention as to why they receive money from the Department of Defense.

[akoff 0]

and moreHurricane Katrina exposed the truth about congressional appropriators. Instead of fully funding high-priority levees and flood control projects, appropriators have chosen to fund their own pet projects across the country, and even within the Gulf States. The 942 projects included in this bill will receive $1.6 billion in 2006, a 16 percent decrease from the $1.9 billion in fiscal 2005.$100,327,000, a 56 percent increase from fiscal year 2005, for projects in the state of Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee member Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and the district of House appropriator Rodney Alexander (R-La.) including: $13,500,000 for the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway; $11,250,000 for the Inner Harbor Canal Lock, which has been deemed ineffective because of changing water traffic patterns; $2,250,000 for Mississippi River Outlets in Venice; $1,170,000 for Barartaria Bay; $500,000 for the Louisiana State University Sugar-Based Ethanol Project; $442,000 for Lake Providence Harbor; $400,000 for Louisiana Immersive Technologies Enterprise Program at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette; $375,000 for Ascension Parish environmental infrastructure; $172,000 for Mississippi River Ship Channel; and $77,000 for Madison Parish Port. One would assume that the increase in Louisiana earmarks could be attributed to Hurricane Katrina. Unfortunately, this was not the case as the majority of projects added by the appropriations committee do not concern flood control or the reparation of destroyed levees. For example, 13.4 percent of total Louisiana pork, or $13,500,000, was allocated to one project, the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, even though it is only used by 4 percent of Louisiana’s commercial traffic. And, according to the Army Corps of Engineers, the waterway’s costs will not be justified until 2046.$83,500,000 for projects at the Yazoo Basin in the state of Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), including: $25,000,000 for miscellaneous water sources in the Yazoo Basin; $22,000,000 for the Delta Headwaters Project; and $20,000,000 for the backwater pumping plants. Yazoo Basin projects are receiving 63.3 percent more than the state of Mississippi received from the entire Energy and Water bill in fiscal year 2005 and have exceeded the President’s fiscal 2006 budget request of $28,920,00 by 188 percent.$79,745,000 for projects in the state of Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Harry Reid (D-Nev.), including: $14,300,000 for the University of Nevada, Las Vegas ($5,000,000 to study the deep burn-up of nuclear fuel and other fuel cycle research, $3,400,000 for the study of hydrogen fuel cell and storage, $3,400,000 to research the solar-powered thermo-chemical production of hydrogen, and $2,500,000 for photonics research and the evaluation of advanced fiber optics for hybrid solar lighting); $3,400,000 for the National Center on Energy Management and Building Technology; $3,500,000 for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s virtual- site office; $2,500,000 for Altair Nanotech; $1,000,000 for materials reliability at the University of Nevada- Reno Center; and $250,000 for the Mojave Bird Study. Due to previous concerns regarding the safety of birds in the area, an environmental impact report, released in July of 2004, revealed that the death toll on red-tailed hawks and other bird species in the area would be minimal following the construction of a wind farm. According to an article published by Judith Lewis in LA Weekly, the local Audubon groups that led the attack on the Pine Tree Wind Farm offered to pay for a meticulous study that would focus specifically on the songbirds. However, the government insisted on conducting their own study using taxpayer dollars to fund the project.$56,078,000 added by the Senate in the state of Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), including: $11,650,000 for construction of the Santa Ana River Mainstem; $10,000,000 for the San Gabriel Basin Restoration Project; $7,000,000 for the UCLA Institute for Molecular Medicine; $3,000,000 for the American River Watershed; $3,000,000 for the San Ramon Valley Recycled Water Project; $2,900,000 for regional wetlands in Lake Tahoe; $1,440,000 for the San Francisco Bay Long-Term Management Study; $1,250,000 for the Long Beach Desalination Project; $1,000,000 for the Sacramento River Division Study; $1,000,000 for a water reclamation project in Orange County; $500,000 for the Arnold Palmer Prostate Center; $400,000 for the California Hydrogen Infrastructure Project; and $300,000 for Surfside-Sunset and Newport beaches. Senator Feinstein told reporters, “The problem with earmarks is they’re put in in the dark of night and they are unknown. I recognize that earmarks have been abused.” Fifty-six million dollars later, the other side of her mouth is probably singing a different tune.$53,730,000 for projects in the state of Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), including: $11,000,000 for the Mind Institute; $9,076,000 for the Middle Rio Grande Project; $5,000,000 for New Mexico environmental infrastructure; $4,000,000 for the Rio Grande Bosque rehabilitation; $3,500,000 for the nuclear energy materials test station at Los Alamos Neutron Science Center; and $1,000,000 for the Navajo electrification process.$17,500,000 for projects in the district of House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman David Hobson (R-Ohio), including: $13,000,000 for Ohio environmental infrastructure; $3,000,000 for the NextEdge Technical Park in Springfield; $1,500,000 for the Springfield Equestrian Center Energy Efficiency Project; and $1,000,000 for the Ohio State University 4-H Green Building Project. Representative Hobson told CQ Today that lawmakers’ resistance to the energy budget cuts proposed by the Bush administration “may be a little bit of a problem. I totally agree with all the goals. I just have to make sure we spend the money in the right places and that we don’t damage good programs that are already out there.”

[hblask 1]

Don't worry, under Obama all that stuff will be fixed, and you'll be happy to pay taxes for all the good stuff that is left.

[akoff 0]

the best part is that i am not hard core "no spending" i don't even doubt some of the money is well spent...it is just that there is an endless stream of waste!!!back to work now. I just laid off 10 people and need to try and get more business. I do realize that 10 men doesn't sound like much until you consider they all have a family and bills to pay. It is the worst thing i have to do by far...you never get used to it. On the good side I seldom need to go here and i have brought back almost every person that has ever been laid off.Still sucks.

[Sheiky 0]

So he's going to increase spending AND cut taxes AND balance the budget? Wow, he is a miracle worker isn't he, the next messiah!Seriously, are people stupid enough to believe this crap?Question: If the government spends $100 billion dollars to hire teams to dig holes and then fill them back in, is that good for the economy or bad for the economy?This isn't a frivolous question; your answer to this question is a good indicator on your understanding of economics.

Er, no, it isn't. It's a really dumb and semantic question the distorts whatever reality it's trying to represent.

[hblask 1]

Er, no, it isn't. It's a really dumb and semantic question the distorts whatever reality it's trying to represent.

That's a beautiful evasion, but since this is the internet, it's just OK to admit you don't know instead of trying to pretend the question doesn't matter.It's an extremely important question in two contexts: where does wealth come from, and what is wasteful spending, both relevant to the discussion.

[JustDoIt 10]

Tax Cuts + Spending Cuts = Prosperity Check out what happened with Ireland when they cut their business rate to 12%.....they had a economic boom.

[Sheiky 0]

That's a beautiful evasion, but since this is the internet, it's just OK to admit you don't know instead of trying to pretend the question doesn't matter.It's an extremely important question in two contexts: where does wealth come from, and what is wasteful spending, both relevant to the discussion.

I don't know? I don't even get what there is to know about that question, it's not difficult.Wealth comes from the creation of goods and services, by investing in projects that improve the productive capacity of an economy. Wealth is not money - Money represents wealth. Net wealth is the measure of Assets-minus liabilities. To answer the question -The act of digging then filling wholes as you describe is an arbitrary choice designed to represent an activity that has no practical purpose or economic value. They could be being paid to sit on their ass all day and there would still be no positive effect on the economy. Two questions need to be answered, were these workers unemployed beforehand? And how is the $100billion being financed? If the workers were unemployed beforehand, then the project is not taking any productive potential out of the economy. True, if the government made every unemployed worker dig holes full time, then that would mean that there would be a dearth of human capital and the economy would suffer, but as you didn't specify, I'm assuming this isn't a significant factor. If the government has $100 billion to spare, then this project is effectively giving people $100 billion that wasn't previously in the system. They will use that money on goods and services that benefit the American economy and increase consumption and GDP, which is good for the economy of. However, this money has likely come from the taxes of other American's, in which case there would be a negative effect as the act of taking and distributing the money would incur costs that reduce the overall amount. If the government is loaning this money, then there will be a bigger negative effect in the future as more of the Federal budget is spent on interest repayments. However, this opportunity cost of this project is obviously huge. That $100 billion could be invested back into the economy, perhaps in improving infrastructure or funding college tuition. An investment like this would increase the long term potential of the economy as well as creating the short term benefits of lower unemployment (and the related benefits mentioned before). It could also be used in other ways, to pay down public debt, or to give back via tax cuts that would increase consumption and could provide incentives for American and Foreignbusiness to invest more on capital goods, further improving the long term economic outlook.I re-iterate, that is a dumb example of what you're trying to prove. No one is paying people to dig whole and fill them up again (or at least if they are, it's not very widespread and I would agree that it should be stopped).

[Sheiky 0]

And I don't really get what point you're getting at with all the CRTL+Vs AKof, unless it's to complain about the relentless appropriation culture in Congress which wasn't what we were discussing. I read a lot of that list, and from what I saw, most of the projects described were for perfectly reasonable and valuable causes.

[Balloon guy 158]

So tax cuts are good?But only when the people getting them pay little taxes?So a bunch of people get $500, one time, and that will fix the economy by...them buying mufflers?So business's are the root of our economy?Then shouldn't we help businesses and reduce them from paying the highest tax rate of any country in the world?Or should we continue to tax them, take the money and give it back to people who are only consumers, so we can continue to tax the businesses at 35%?Is this the circle of life?

[El Guapo 10]

Tax Cuts + Spending Cuts = Prosperity Check out what happened with Ireland when they cut their business rate to 12%.....they had a economic boom.

-sha-lak-lak-boom

[hblask 1]

OK, Sheiky, thanks for your thoughtful reply. You've touched on most of the key points when thinking about this problem, but you seem to have missed one very key point: wealth is created when two parties engage in voluntary mutual exchange. This is important to keep in mind when you think about government programs, because government spending not a voluntary mutual exchange; it is a forced exchange arranged by those with political power.So is government spending good or bad for the economy? The case of digging holes is the extreme example where the answer is clearly no. This is the equivalent of what FDR did in the 30s that helped turn an economic downswing into a decade long depression. On the other extreme, most people would be willing to put up a few dollars to protect our borders from foreign invaders, so national defense (the part that isn't waste) is probably a net positive for the economy.And in between is everything else. And if you think about it, the answer in almost every case is that the federal spending is a net negative for the economy. Why? Because if people wanted something, they would just use their money to get it. If it's not getting built, it's a sign that people would prefer to engage in OTHER voluntary consensual transactions that increase wealth more than whatever is not being built. Instead, we get the transaction desired by people with political power rather than the transaction preferred by the people who earned the money.There are arguments that we need the federal govt to do certain things, such as the space program, but why? There are voluntary private agencies wishing to engage in space travel, and the reason they don't is because of one, the "free" competition, and two, because they are regulated out of existence. (Also, people whose car is broken down and who need a washing machine don't care if we know the methane content of Saturn's moons). So what you will find is that in most cases (I'd estimate 95%), federal programs are a net drain on the economy because the spending is for things that people wouldn't pay for on their own given a free choice, or things that they would pay for if it was possible for private companies to do them instead. That, by the way, is the (somewhat) hidden cost of every govt program -- the cost of eliminating a flourishing, competitive free market where people can readily move money to areas that create the most wealth. This opportunity cost is a huge drag on our economy -- all the stifled entrepreneurs and dreamers who just stay at their mundane same-as-always jobs.So the short answer is, no, for the most part, you can't stimulate the economy by federal spending on things that people don't want. This is why if Obama gets his way with his deficit spending spree, he will extend the current recession into a multi-year disaster. And sadly, once again, free markets will take the blame for political mismanagement.

[AmScray 354]

He's probably saving that stuff up for his 2nd term amirite?

If you want to establish some sort of terms, I would gladly wager real (grossly inflated by that time) US dollars that a second Hussein term will be a philosophical 'world away' from the first, which is motivated by the spirit of lets-come-together'isms.You apparently haven't seen what tenure can do to a college professor. It's about what a second term does to a president.

[BigDMcGee 3,367]

If you want to establish some sort of terms, I would gladly wager real (grossly inflated by that time) US dollars that a second Hussein term will be a philosophical 'world away' from the first, which is motivated by the spirit of lets-come-together'isms.You apparently haven't seen what tenure can do to a college professor. It's about what a second term does to a president.

First of all, that assumes that congress will still be republican by the second ( hypothetical) obama admisitration. Clinton didn't exactly go hog-wild socialist during his second term (which had a republican majority). With a democratic majority... you could be right..

[KONGOS 0]

Explain how overspending is what got us here?I think it's a right wing myth that all our problems magically disappear when we stop 'wasteful' government spending. It seems to me to be a belief based more on mantra and ideology more than reality. A belief perpetuated by right-wingers who want to create the image that the US federal government steals you money then randomly burns it, rallying against this kind of government is easy and grabs votes, but I don't think it's realistic. All this money that they're spending domestically, it's being use for something. It's being invested in infrastructure and health care, for social security and research and development, for those earmarks that benefit state communities. I agree that America should look towards achieving a budget surplus and that the current amount of government debt is not healthy and that imo defence spending should be cut. But all too often it's just a pop culture idea perpetuated by people like Ronald Reagan, whom I might had oversaw a massive increase in national debt despite just as Bush has done, despite the promises.

September 10th, 2001 Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon could not account for 2.3 TRILLION dollars. Need I say more?"We know it's gone. But we don't know what they spent it on," said Jim Minnery, Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

[ajs510 122]

September 10th, 2001 Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon could not account for 2.3 TRILLION dollars. Need I say more?"We know it's gone. But we don't know what they spent it on," said Jim Minnery, Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

4. Credit Card Abuse at the Department of DefenseThe Defense Department has uncovered its own credit card scandal. Over one recent 18-month period, Air Force and Navy personnel used govern­ment-funded credit cards to charge at least $102,400 for admission to entertainment events, $48,250 for gambling, $69,300 for cruises, and $73,950 for exotic dance clubs and prostitutes.[5]

Who says government work is dull?Also, I take issue with the notion that hookers, gambling, and lap dances fall under the category of "wasteful spending". I'd rather they spend my tax money on that than half the bullshit they *actually* spend it on.