ShangriLaTroubl
02-08-2005, 06:54 PM
He's really going all out in his 2nd term...just like i knew he would...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The Bush administration Monday proposed cutting the Environmental Protection Agency budget by nearly 6 percent to $7.57 billion in fiscal 2006 by targeting a program that helps cities replace aging sewage systems
"Total EPA funding would decline from $8 billion, which Congress allocated in the current budget year for the agency to protect the nation's air, water and land. In 2004, the EPA had a budget of $8.4 billion."
----
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A sharply divided Congress began debating the Bush administration's $2.57 trillion budget for fiscal year 2006 Tuesday, with Democrats criticizing administration officials on topics from the proposed Social Security overhaul to the deficit.
"This budget is not going to put us on a path to balancing the budget. Not in five years, not in 10 years, not in 20 years," U.S. Rep. John Spratt, D-South Carolina, told Joshua Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
"It would put us on a path to endless deficits and a Mount Everest of mountainous debt," said Spratt, the ranking minority member on the House Budget Committee. "
"Committee member Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, was among those holding Snow's feet to the fire.
"Rangel said he plans to issue a statement saying the president's proposal for Social Security's partial privatization is dead, as it is not included in the 2006 budget. "
"He said it probably would not be included in next year's budget because the administration would not want Republicans to touch "that third rail" in a midterm election year.
He also said the costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not in the budget. The administration has said the $80 billion Bush is seeking for military action is a supplemental to the budget."
In remarks to the Detroit, Michigan, Economic Club, Bush defended the program cuts by saying those on the chopping block have not shown good results.
"My 2006 budget eliminates or substantially reduces more than 150 federal programs that are not succeeding, that are duplicating existing efforts or that are not fulfilling an essential priority," he said.
House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, had harsh words for naysayers as the hearing opened, saying it is easy for Democrats to criticize the budget without offering an alternative.
"You are not allowed in this committee to say 'no' without an alternative," Nussle told committee members. " 'No' is not an answer. We're going to come up with alternatives and solutions."
Twelve of 23 major government agencies will receive less money under the new budget than in 2005.
Among the 150 government programs slated for significant cuts or elimination are health benefits for more affluent veterans, federal subsidies for Amtrak and grants for school literacy and anti-drug programs
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The Bush administration Monday proposed cutting the Environmental Protection Agency budget by nearly 6 percent to $7.57 billion in fiscal 2006 by targeting a program that helps cities replace aging sewage systems
"Total EPA funding would decline from $8 billion, which Congress allocated in the current budget year for the agency to protect the nation's air, water and land. In 2004, the EPA had a budget of $8.4 billion."
----
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A sharply divided Congress began debating the Bush administration's $2.57 trillion budget for fiscal year 2006 Tuesday, with Democrats criticizing administration officials on topics from the proposed Social Security overhaul to the deficit.
"This budget is not going to put us on a path to balancing the budget. Not in five years, not in 10 years, not in 20 years," U.S. Rep. John Spratt, D-South Carolina, told Joshua Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
"It would put us on a path to endless deficits and a Mount Everest of mountainous debt," said Spratt, the ranking minority member on the House Budget Committee. "
"Committee member Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, was among those holding Snow's feet to the fire.
"Rangel said he plans to issue a statement saying the president's proposal for Social Security's partial privatization is dead, as it is not included in the 2006 budget. "
"He said it probably would not be included in next year's budget because the administration would not want Republicans to touch "that third rail" in a midterm election year.
He also said the costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not in the budget. The administration has said the $80 billion Bush is seeking for military action is a supplemental to the budget."
In remarks to the Detroit, Michigan, Economic Club, Bush defended the program cuts by saying those on the chopping block have not shown good results.
"My 2006 budget eliminates or substantially reduces more than 150 federal programs that are not succeeding, that are duplicating existing efforts or that are not fulfilling an essential priority," he said.
House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, had harsh words for naysayers as the hearing opened, saying it is easy for Democrats to criticize the budget without offering an alternative.
"You are not allowed in this committee to say 'no' without an alternative," Nussle told committee members. " 'No' is not an answer. We're going to come up with alternatives and solutions."
Twelve of 23 major government agencies will receive less money under the new budget than in 2005.
Among the 150 government programs slated for significant cuts or elimination are health benefits for more affluent veterans, federal subsidies for Amtrak and grants for school literacy and anti-drug programs