Democrats' proposed budget

[markyj987]

Well, I'm not a fan of the Democrats, but from this little blurb, it sounds like they might be doing a good job on something. (Of course, I'm sure there will be spending in the budget I oppose, but given Bush's spend spend spend pattern, I'm willing to be open-minded about the Democrats' proposal.)

Certainly, I don't know how they plan for US to pay for it--but we'll see what happens when the unbiased number crunchers analyze it.

----------------

Senate Democrats' budget leaves war funding intact

By Richard Wolf, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats will unveil a 2008 budget today that would boost spending for uninsured children, students and veterans without cutting funds for defense or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The budget also would not roll back any of President Bush's tax cuts after 2010, when they are set to expire. It says the tax cuts can be extended if they are paid for.

The spending plan, to be voted on Thursday by the Senate Budget Committee, is more specific about its additions than its subtractions. Most decisions on how to pay for new spending or tax cuts are left to the committees that will turn the budget blueprint into legislation.

"We do not tell them how to raise the money," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who chairs the budget panel. "We do not tell (them) how to spend the money."

In fact, the budget is most notable for what it would not do, despite Democrats' attacks: reduce Bush's war spending or tax cuts. Senate Democrats do not want to be seen as hurting troops or taxpayers. House Democrats will unveil their proposal next week.

It will be the first budget written solely by Democrats in 13 years.

The omissions and lack of specifics on how the new initiatives would be paid for prompted questions from Republicans.

"We'll need to take a look at the details to see if the math adds up to a tax increase on American families and job creators, a move which would put our strong economy in jeopardy," White House budget director Rob Portman said.

The budget resolution sets the parameters for the tax and spending bills that comprise the federal budget. It does not have to get passed, and it does not require the president's signature. But without it, the budget process in Congress usually breaks down, as it did last year when Republicans failed to pass most appropriations bills.

Highlights of the plan:

•This year's $248 billion budget deficit would rise to $249 billion next year. By 2012, it would be replaced by a $132 billion surplus.

•The Children's Health Insurance Program would get up to $50 billion more over five years, about $45 billion more than Bush proposed and enough to insure all eligible children. Education programs would get about $6 billion more than Bush proposed next year, and veterans programs would rise by about $3.5 billion.

•The Defense and State departments would get the full $142 billion Bush seeks in 2008 for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Democrats also kept Bush's proposed $481 billion defense budget, a $49 billion boost over this year.

•Tax rates would not be increased, but the budget would seek to clamp down on tax cheats and offshore tax shelters to raise new revenue. The alternative minimum tax, which targets the rich, would not raise taxes on the middle class for two years — one year more than Bush proposes.

[wtnhunt]

Re: Democrats\' proposed budget

[ QUOTE ]

Senate Democrats do not want to be seen as hurting troops or taxpayers

[/ QUOTE ]

This has not stopped some of them in the past, what makes it any different now?

[ QUOTE ]

The omissions and lack of specifics on how the new initiatives would be paid for prompted questions from Republicans.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm, Yeah, leaves me wondering as well . Money has to come from somewhere.

[ QUOTE ]

•Tax rates would not be increased, but the budget would seek to clamp down on tax cheats and offshore tax shelters to raise new revenue. The alternative minimum tax, which targets the rich, would not raise taxes on the middle class for two years — one year more than Bush proposes.

[/ QUOTE ]

This all sounds good, but lets be realistic, is the government not already clamping down on cheats? What about the middle income as they are calling it, seems some dems consider the working and middle class taxpayers to be wealthy. Has everyone forgotten Kerry and the dems in 04 repeatedly accusing the president of giving the tax cuts and credits only to the wealthiest american taxpayers . Dont think I can forget that. We got some of our own money back thanks to Bush, and have continued to benefit from the tax breaks. Had the dems had their way then we would not have, and we are far from rich.

Something with this just does not add up Mark. If they push this through, look for anyone who does not qualify for eic to get hit with raised taxes at some point in the future as a result.

[Texan_Til_I_Die]

Re: Democrats\' proposed budget

From The Washington Examiner...

[ QUOTE ]

WASHINGTON - Congress has loaded up President Bush's request for "emergency" spending on the Iraq war with more than $20 billion in "pork" for members' districts.

Money for peanut storage in Georgia, spinach growers in California, menhaden in the Atlantic Ocean and even more office space for the lawmakers themselves is included in what has ballooned into a $124 billion war bill.

"This emergency supplemental bill has more ornaments hanging over our many branches of government than the White House Christmas tree," Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., said.

Originally, Bush asked for $105 billion in emergency funding. Democratic leaders say they want to grant the request to continue funding the war despite their desire to end it. <why am I not surprised?>

"We have provided all of the money the president requested- and more," boasted House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer.

That includes $74 million for peanut storage, $25 million for spinach growers and $100 million for citrus growers.

It also includes $16 million to convert the old Food and Drug Administration building in southwest D.C. into more office space for the Capitol. That "emergency" expenditure comes at a time when taxpayers already shell out $600 million "more than double the original estimate" for a mammoth expansion of the Capitol, which includes 160,000 feet of new office space.

[/ QUOTE ]