 |
 |
|
 |
|
Bush Campaign Ads . . . Brought to You by Special Interests
As President Bush's $10.5 million campaign ad blitz begins, Public Citizen released a report outlining who helped pay for the campaign ads and what favors they have received during his presidency.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
No Child Left Behind? The Funding Gap in ESEA and Other Federal Education Programs
The current reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), raises high expectations for achievement and imposes stringent measures of accountability on students, teachers, and schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 1, 2003
Bush Action on Fiscal Discipline Doesn't Follow Rhetoric
Congress will be returning to Washington against its own wishes to finish up the budget for fiscal year 2004, which officially started two months ago today. But even as President Bush has maintained that it's imperative to "continue this notion of reminding the investors and consumers alike that we're going to have fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C.,"1 he's done little to promote it himself, with government spending increasing more than 27 percent in the previous two fiscal years.2 In fact, the investor class he's reminding of fiscal discipline in Washington is warning that, "The U.S. budget is out of control," as asserted weeks ago by Wall Street investment firm Goldman Sachs & Co.3
The remarkable growth in discretionary funding led Senator John McCain to remark that Bush deserved some of the blame, saying, "The president cannot say, as he has many times, that 'I'm going to tell Congress to enforce some spending discipline' and then not veto bills."4 Former Congressional Budget Office director Robert Reischauer agreed, saying, "Spending restraint and tax increases are unnatural acts on Capitol Hill. It takes some political leadership from White House, some external motivation, to get Congress to focus on the deficit, and there doesn't seem to be any of those forces at work."5
The administration asserted that "The president has said that he would spend what's necessary to win the war on terrorism and protect Americans at home, but outside these items, he has put a serious brake on other spending, which is key to halving these deficits over five years." But even conservatives have taken issue with this. Heritage Foundation scholar Brian Riedl noted recently that only 45 percent of all new federal spending since 2001 has been related to defense and terror attacks, and that federal spending topped $20,000 per household for the first time since World War II.6
Independent budget analysts suggest that beyond presidential statements supporting fiscal discipline, the administration has not prioritized the issue. Stan Collender said, "This is an administration that cannot possibly take up the mantle of fiscal conservatism. It's probably the least fiscally conservative in history."7
Sources:
- Question and Answer Session, 8/6/03.
- "Government Outgrows Cap Set by President; Discretionary Spending Up 12.5% in Fiscal '03," Washington Post, 11/12/03, p. A01.
- "Alarms Sounded On Cost of GOP Bills; Lawmakers Increase Spending to Win Votes," Washington Post, 11/24/03, p. A01.
- Fox News Sunday, 11/30/03.
- "Alarms Sounded On Cost of GOP Bills; Lawmakers Increase Spending to Win Votes," Washington Post, 11/24/03, p. A01.
- "Most New Spending Since 2001 Unrelated to the War on Terrorism," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, 11/13/03.
- "Government Outgrows Cap Set by President; Discretionary Spending Up 12.5% in Fiscal '03," Washington Post, 11/12/03, p. A01.
Send the Misleader to a Friend | Print It | Misleader Archive
|
|
