I submit that they are only two and that you are guilty of trying to pad the count. 
So it is possible that the previous administration could have had a budget double of the current one but approved funding a fraction of the current funding? Not saying this is the case… just that it’s possible.
So when comparing budget numbers to actuals, we’re talking apples and oranges and your evaluation of actuals may be in error. No?
Quicksilver - not even close. I have been following this thread and have composed posts to it on several occasions. But I have refrained from submitting them for the same reason I don’t typically participate in Great Debates: I don’t see the value in engaging in this type of online discussion. Folks who have a certain point of view about this Administration are extremely unlikely to change that.
Also, I tend to treat this message board like a social situation, where it is considered bad form and/or inappropriate to discuss religion and politics.
Bottom line, I feel like Bush & Co. have had a profound impact on my mindset, my family, my dealings with other people in my community, my sense of what it means to be an American, my thinking on the challenges we face culturally and economically in the future as a country and a number of other things. However, I choose not to detail each of these for the reasons stated above.
Nonetheless, to assume that the actions of Bush & Co. are a “tempest in a teapot” could not be more inaccurate.
I’m certainly guilty of not proofreading too carefully.
Budget resolutions only matter in the year they are enacted, and they usually don’t get down to the level of setting amounts for each individual agency, so if we are talking about NSF the budget resolutions don’t matter.
What is possible – and it seems to have happened here – is that when the NSF was reauthorized its authorized level of funding was set well above what the actual level of funding has been. However, to compare one to the other is comparing apples and oranges. Authorized levels are theoretical and as long as Congress does not exceed them, they are basically ignored. Appropriated levels are what you need to pay attention to. That is what Congress spends year to year on the program.
When someone in DC tries to compare authorized levels to appropriated levels and then make it seem as if a program has been gutted, they are being dishonest. They know it isn’t the case, but it’s an easy way to sound alarm about government funding – “Congress said we’d get this much money but we are only getting this amount! We are being screwed!” Well, no, Congress did not say you would get that amount. Congress said that Congress can appropriate *up to * that amount. Big difference.
No. My numbers come from appropriations bills, which is what should be looked at in terms of spending for discretionary programs. Both authorized funding and budgetary allocations are essentially theoretical. The appropriations process is what really decides what gets spent. A key thing to keep in mind is that when you are talking about budgets or authorized levels in DC, that really means very little. Appropriations numbers are the real amount that gets spent year to year. So when Bush came into office, the appropriated amount for NSF was $4.6 billion. This year, it is $5.4 billion. Those are the real numbers for the program. That is the actual money going to NSF.
I’m not here to diminish the value of your feelings about this administration nor how these feelings manifest themselves in a very real way in your life and the lives of people with whom you interact. However, these feelings are your reaction to the actions/decisions made by BushCo and I’m interested in the direct imapact of said actions, not the emotional reactions to them (understandable though they may be).
I’ll share with you an anecdotal example if I may as to why reaction is suspect.
Like most people in the US, I watched the 9/11 tragedy unfold and can remember very precisely where I was and what I was doing at that very moment that the news broke on television and radio.
I watched with stoney silence and no small amount of dread. My uncle (we’re close like brothers) watched as well. In watching he shook with fear, horror and tears. I do not feel any more/less safe today than in the day preceeding the event. My uncle lives in fear of terrorism. I experienced these events while living with my children, 8 miles from the Pentagon. My uncle lives (safely) in Canada. Same event – different reactions.
Ah - okay - I hear you and see the difference. I respect that and the fact that this is your thread. To me, I find the distinction to be splitting hairs - obviously, someone who is out of business, lost a relative to the war or had some other profound emotional/economic/physical impact is much, much more affected that folks whose mindsets and day-to-day dealings are somewhat affected.
Bush’s reaction to 9/11 has led to defence spending in the U.K. not being cut. I work in that industry. I do not think that my job has been saved - I also work outside, and I’m very good at what I do - but it has lent considerable stability to my position.
Not at all. As I said, it’s hard to tell. For instance, one can say with certainty that cigarette smoking increases one’s chances of developing lung cancer. If somebody who smokes has lung cancer, can you definitely say that cigarette smoking caused that case? No.
Bush has caused real damage to our standing debt, which will take probably 30 years to correct.
He has caused damage to the environment, and I believe increased global warming, that will take more than one hundred years to correct.
He has hurt our global standing (right after 9/11 the world was very pro-US - even freaking Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro offered their sorrow at the attacks). The world (rightly) hates us now, by and large - especially Muslim countries. I’d put that at maybe 20 years’ worth of damage to correct.
He’s hurt prescription drugs’ availability, by pushing through ‘drug reform’ essentially written by the drug companies.
He’s hurting our childrens’ educations by allowing fundamentalists to espouse crap in public classrooms, that will further the gulf between Americans’ educations and other countries’. That’s a generation to correct.
He’s increased likelihood of terror against us in the name of decreasing it.
He’s hurt our government by cajoling his congress into allowing him to be above the law. That’s a precedent that I don’t want to begin to guess how long the damage will last. It may be looked back upon as the beginning of the end of the once great American nation.
And he’s put soldiers in harm’s way for a terrible reason.
That’s no tempest in a teapot. Your premise is seriously flawed.
I wasn’t aware that the president of the United States controls what is taught in classrooms.
For me that is like asking, “Other than the fact that your children drowned, how did you enjoy your vacation?”
This Presidency is all about moral outrage. The balance of power seems to be shifting. I don’t think that I live in a country that is still protected by the Constitution. This President can operate in secrecy, reward incompetence, tell outrageous lies, break the law – and we seem helpless to do anything about it.
What’s even worse is that support for his policies has exposed a dark and mindless side of American society that I didn’t know was there. Seemingly normal Americans will defend the use of torture and the imprisonment of hundreds of people indefinitely without access to the legal system.
Under his leadership, we are surrendering the civil rights that no one could have taken from us without bloodshed.
I have no faith in elections or the legislative system. I expect the next Democratic candidate to be swiftboated and the voting machines to be rigged. There will be no sufficient paper trail.
My medicines cost me more this year. The AMA says that they are going to stop seeing some Medicare patients because funding is too low. My 67 year old sister gets a shot once a month that costs $6000 each time. What is a person on Social Security to do?
Meanwhile, she looks after our 93 year old mother.
I have it much better than either of them except for losing my pride and trust in my country.
Under current law, Medicare spending is projected to jump from $395 billion in FY 2007 to $504.4 billion in FY 2011 and to total roughly $2 trillion over that same period. Fully funding Medicare’s promised benefits would require the Medicare payroll tax to jump from today’s 2.9 percent to 13.4 percent.
I’m going to surprise myself, a lifelong Democrat/Independent who believes in socialized medicine and environmental issues and say that I can actually see one direct, clear personal benefit to Bushco.
Colin Powell pushed for the creation of the Democratic Readiness Initiative, which created approximately 1,000 new entry level positions in the U.S. Foreign Service and authorized appropriations for salaries. So therefore, no Powell and I wouldn’t necessarily have a job today; no Bush, no Powell.
However, the cack-handed foreign policy that this administration has created has made my job more difficult to do, and the environment I do it in more hostile, so it’s bittersweet at best.
For me, Bush’s presidency means:
2009 can’t come soon enough for me.
The fact that the default assumption has changed to “Hijacker is a clown who wants a free ride to Cuba – the smart thing to do is cooperate” to “Hijacker is a fanatic who wants to use the plane as a missile – the smart thing to do is try to take him down” has nothing whatsoever to do with George of the Bungle.
Please explain what Bush did to raise your gasoline and natural gas bills.
In the 2000 campaign, Bush was quoted (don’t have a cite, sorry, but I remember reading it, I think in Newsweek) as saying that, as a former oil 'n gas guy, he was going to ensure that OPEC didn’t raise the price of crude too much. Guess what? No such luck. Bush also named Cheney to head the energy policy commission which met with great secrecy and furtiveness before issuing a report which said, essentially, a) drill more wells, b) build more nuclear power plants, and c) conservation and energy efficiency are for wusses.
The Bush Administration’s energy policies aren’t solely responsible for my energy bills going up, it’s true, but they sure ain’t helpin’.
Off the top of my head…
My health care expenses have risen dramatically, coinciding with my employer sharply cutting benefits. So, inspite of my raises over the years, I now earn effectively less than I did a few years ago. This is a direct side effect of Bush’s “all is well” inaction over the current healthcare crisis.
My wife was denied acceptance to a PhD program as a direct result of federal funding cuts (it was a great “sure thing” educational path when she started school). She is now in educational limbo looking for a holdover job for the day when/if funding restores open positions.
The national debt and imbalanced budget has had a stagnating effect on the economy, and will take decades to recover. I have far fewer job options or ability to increase my career as a result of the stagnant economy.
I love to travel abroad, and I now feel more like a target for ire, than a welcomed tourist. There are whole sections of the world now that I would not even consider visiting, where I would have been perfectly safe prior to his administration. American? Sorry, no, I’m Canadian, eh! Get oot of my way!
I’m not sure if you’re taking the piss here or not. If you are then it’s a funny and very revealing post. If not, what does BushCo’s health care policy have to do with Canada’s health policies?
Umm…I think that last bit is akin to putting a Canadian rather than American flag on your backpack when going through Europe, not that he actuall is Canadian.
What federal funding cuts were these? All the information I’ve seen points to vastly increased federal spending on education during the Bush term, but the cuts you are talking about may be in another area.
I’ll grant you that energy prices aren’t lower because of Bush, but I fail to see from your examples how any of his actions made them higher.
I no longer trust our government. I worry that we will alienate and anger more countries as time goes on. I am more concerned about global warming now. It bothers me that just about anything–war, torture, wiretapping, etc.–becomes “acceptable” if someone spins it long enough. I can’t even bear to look at images of Bush and Co. I wonder if there’s any point in voting and if the votes are all being counted properly. I wonder if someone is checking on what I’m doing at the library or on the computer.
And so on.