The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Teresa Heilevang on August 01, 2011, 09:54:27 PM
-
These are all the programs that the new Republican House have proposed cutting. Read to the end.
Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy. $445 million annual savings.
Save America 's Treasures Program. $25 million annual savings.
International Fund for Ireland . $17 million annual savings.
Legal Services Corporation. $420 million annual savings.
National Endowment for the Art s. $167.5 million annual savings.
National Endowment for the Humanities. $167.5 million annual savings.
Hope VI Program. $250 million annual savings.
Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
Eliminate duplicative education programs. H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.
U.S. Trade Development Agency. $55 million annual savings.
Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy. $20 million annual savings.
Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings.
John C. Stennis Center Subsidy. $430,000 annual savings.
Community Development Fund. $4.5 billion annual savings.
Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid. $24 million annual savings.
Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half. $7.5 billion annual savings
Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%. $600 million annual savings.
Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.
Technology Innovation Program. $70 million annual savings.
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program. $125 million annual savings.
Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization. $530 million annual savings.
Beach Replenishment. $95 million annual savings.
New Starts Transit. $2 billion annual savings.
Exchange Programs for Alaska , Natives Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts . $9 million annual savings
Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion annual savings.
Title X Family Planning. $318 million annual savings.
Appalachian Regional Commission. $76 million annual savings.
Economic Development Administration. $293 million annual savings.
Programs under the National and Community Services Act. $1.15 billion annual savings.
Applied Research at Department of Energy. $1.27 billion annual savings.
FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership. $200 million annual savings.
Energy Star Program. $52 million annual savings.
Economic Assistance to Egypt . $250 million annually.
U.S. Agency for International Development. $1.39 billion annual savings.
General Assistance to District of Columbia . $210 million annual savings.
Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. $150 million annual savings.
Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years.
No funding for federal office space acquisition. $864 million annual savings.
End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.
Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. More than $1 billion annually.
IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget. $1.8 billion savings over ten years.
Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total
savings.......... :o :o WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :o :o
Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees. $1.2 billion savings over ten years.
Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings.
Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress.
Eliminate Mohair Subsidies. $1 million annual savings.
Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. $12.5 million annual savings
Eliminate Market Access Program. $200 million annual savings.
USDA Sugar Program. $14 million annual savings.
Subsidy to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). $93 million annual savings.
Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. $56.2 million annual savings.
Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs. $900 million savings.
Ready to Learn TV Program. $27 million savings..
HUD Ph.D. Program.
Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act.
TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years
My question is, what THE Heck is all this doing in the budget in the first place?
-
The davis bacon act is actually a good thing, it means local consturction jobs for federal goverment projects. Granted it has bad thinga about it... but hiring of locals will always be a good thing.
-
How did this stuff get into budgets, it called republicans and democrats, two parties, one purpose. Remember, we are here to serve them, not the other way around.
-
You will never see this on the list.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2011/voters_favor_pay_cuts_for_congress_president_until_budget_is_balanced
An overwhelming majority of voters nationwide want members of Congress to take a pay cut until the federal budget is balanced, and a plurality also thinks the president should chop his salary in half until that time.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 82% believe members of Congress should take a 25% pay cut until the federal budget is balanced. Only 14% disagree. (To see survey question wording, click here .)
In August of last year , 75% of Likely Voters said more generally that Congress should cut its own pay until the federal budget is balanced.
Nearly half of voters (48%) also believe the president should take a 50% pay cut until the federal budget is balanced. But 41% don’t share that view, while 11% more are undecided.
The day when a balanced budget comes is a long way off, according to most voters. Just 30% think it is at least somewhat likely that the federal budget will be balanced for even a single year during their lifetimes . That includes only nine percent (9%) who say it’s Very Likely.
(Want a free daily e-mail update ? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook .
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on July 28-29, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC . See methodology.
Whether the budget is balanced or not, 59% of voters don’t think members of Congress should receive government pensions when they leave office, but 25% say they should. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure.
Most voters (52%) don't believe the president should receive a government pension of nearly $200,000 per year when he leaves office either. Thirty-nine percent (39%) disagree and think the president should receive that pension.
There's no partisan disagreement at all when voters are asked if Congress should take a 25% pay cut until the budget is balanced: Democrats, Republicans and voters not affiliated with either major party overwhelmingly agree they should. But while 64% of Republicans and the plurality (49%) of unaffiliated voters favor a 50% pay cut for the president until the budget is balanced, 57% of Democrats think that's a bad idea.
Similarly, most voters from all three groups oppose government pensions for retired members of Congress, but again Democrats balk when it comes to pensions for ex-presidents. Sixty-one percent (61%) of GOP voters and 58% of unaffiliateds oppose giving presidents pensions of nearly $200,000 per year, but 51% of Democrats favor such pensions.
A majority of Mainstream voters favors pay cuts for both Congress and the president until the budget is balanced. Ninety percent (90%) of Political Class voters oppose a salary cut for the president until that day comes, but they're evenly divided over a 25% pay cut for members of Congress until then.
Voter approval of the job Congress is doing has fallen to a new low - for the second month in a row.
Voters have said in the past that those who work for the government get better retirement benefits than those who work for private companies.
Most Americans continue to believe government workers also have more job security than those in the private sector and that they don’t work as hard as private sector workers.
Despite the lengthy wheeling and dealing over the debt ceiling, the end result is exactly what voters expected a week ago and the week before that. Voters overwhelmingly expected the debt ceiling to be raised .
Most also expected that the deal would not include significant spending cuts. Earlier data showed that even if cuts were agreed upon, fewer than half think the savings will actually materialize .
The debt ceiling debate has highlighted the political difficulty of coming to grips with the federal government’s massive debt. Voters now are almost evenly divided over whether they prefer a congressman who would reduce that debt with spending cuts only or opt for a mix of spending cuts and tax increases .
Additional information from this survey and a full demographic breakdown are available to Platinum Members only.
-
You gotta love people who have such strong convictions that they vote "undecided" in one of these polls.
Is that anything like voting "present" as a Senator? ;D
-
You gotta love people who have such strong convictions that they vote "undecided" in one of these polls.
Is that anything like voting "present" as a Senator? ;D
to be fair, alot of the questions they ask in these polls are very bad questions, or are questions that you know nothing about.
-
Actually this one is a no brainer, We have a $14 Tr. debt, should the people running it up help pay it off.
Not just YES, but HELL YES!
-
All of this noise and crap...nothing getting done while they argue and pose and rattle their plastic swords, and out of all that comes a deal where the cuts don't take effect for 10-20 years. I say don't reduce their salary, just give them all a pink slip, lock up Washington and turn it into a big museum to failed government. What a bunch of worthless bastards. The only ones that seem to have any values AT ALL are the tea party guys who just kept saying no, which is bad government but it's better than, 'Well maybe, maybe not, you suck because you are on the OTHER TEAM, what's in it for me, by the way?"
-
All of this noise and crap...nothing getting done while they argue and pose and rattle their plastic swords, and out of all that comes a deal where the cuts don't take effect for 10-20 years. I say don't reduce their salary, just give them all a pink slip, lock up Washington and turn it into a big museum to failed government. What a bunch of worthless bastards. The only ones that seem to have any values AT ALL are the tea party guys who just kept saying no, which is bad government but it's better than, 'Well maybe, maybe not, you suck because you are on the OTHER TEAM, what's in it for me, by the way?"
When all is said and done, more is said than done.
-
Being a government employee and not paying your taxes is like being a debt collector who doesn't pay his debts.
Why hasn't the IRS attached the wages of these employees? After all, it isn't like they can't find their employer.
I am also very surprised that Amtrak was getting that much - I wonder if they will end up eliminating a lot of routes and closing train and bus stations.
How come there aren't any cuts in the Space Program, or did I miss it?
Why don't they consider means testing in order for members of Congress to receive pension benefits?
-
B
How come there aren't any cuts in the Space Program, or did I miss it?
What space program?
-
Being a government employee and not paying your taxes is like being a debt collector who doesn't pay his debts.
Why hasn't the IRS attached the wages of these employees? After all, it isn't like they can't find their employer.
I am also very surprised that Amtrak was getting that much - I wonder if they will end up eliminating a lot of routes and closing train and bus stations.
This is Bidens pet project. He brags about riding Amtrak to work, no way they will defund it.
How come there aren't any cuts in the Space Program, or did I miss it?
Because Obama has already gutted the space program. Remember that their mission now is to tout the technological contributions of the muslims.
Why don't they consider means testing in order for members of Congress to receive pension benefits?
You mean like putting them on trial for betraying the public trust? ;D
-
Any of those cuts would affect someones district and the last thing any career politician wants to do is lose an election.
-
Thanks for the answers.
If they have to put that much money into Amtrak just so Biden can ride to work, they need to admit it is a failed program. In the last few years, they have put some fancy train stations into towns near where I live. No one here commutes on the train. Totally unnecessary.
Amtrak has been sucking money for years. I sort of remember it was supposed to be temporary until it could become profitable.
I wonder how much chaos it would cause if they just cut it in half. Cancel all routes/times that don't carry a full load.
Like in California, in order to save money, they started closing the DMV one extra day per week. I don't think anyone noticed.
-
Amtrak is nothing, they have gotten people to go along with the multi Bn dollar failure known as the war on drugs for 80 years.
-
Amtrak is nothing, they have gotten people to go along with the multi Bn dollar failure known as the war on drugs for 80 years.
And just like the war in Iraq it was supposed to pay for itself (with RICO). Well, guess what? ::) >:(
FQ13
-
And just like the war in Iraq it was supposed to pay for itself (with RICO). Well, guess what? ::) >:(
FQ13
You keep beating that dead horse but you never mention your boys wars in Afghanistan and Libya.
Why is that ?
-
You keep beating that dead horse but you never mention your boys wars in Afghanistan and Libya.
Why is that ?
Because they (W and BO) never promised that they would be cost neutral. However Cheney did make that promise about Iraq. As far as Libya? I'm more pissed about that than Iraq. Gaddafi was on our side. Why did we care what he did to his own? And if we were going to get our panties in a twist over repressive regimes, why not Syria, they are actually a huge threat and have been for decades. I could get behind air strikes on Damascus. But Tripoli? WTF? Anyway, here are the facts calling BS on Wolfowitz's and the White House's assertions that Iraq would pay for its own reconstruction.
FQ13
PRE-WAR OIL REVENUE ESTIMATES
CLAIM: �The oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years�We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.� � Paul Wolfowitz, [Congressional Testimony, 3/27/03]
CLAIM: �Iraq, unlike Afghanistan, is a rather wealthy country. Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction.� � White House Spokesman Ari Fleischer, 2/18/03
FACT: International Oil Daily reported on 9/23/03 that Paul Bremer said that current and future oil revenues will be insufficient for rebuilding Iraq � despite the Administration's pre-war promises.
FACT: The WSJ reported on 9/5/03 that the Administration's oil estimates were �predicated on aggressively optimistic assumptions.�
FACT: While Bremer told Oil Daily that �Iraqi oil infrastructure was much worse than we thought,� a March 2000 report by the U.N. clearly said Iraq oil would be insufficient. The report said the Iraqi oil industry was �lamentable� and that the decline was �accelerating.� Roger Dowan of PFC Energy told NPR on 9/11/03 that the U.N. study the �made very clear that actually the facilities and the capacity to produce oil in Iraq� were far less than the Administration was portraying.
FACT: The NY Times reported on 10/5/03 �The Bush administration's optimistic statements earlier this year that Iraq's oil wealth, not American taxpayers, would cover most of the cost of rebuilding Iraq were at odds with a bleaker assessment of a government task force secretly established last fall to study Iraq's oil industry.�
-
Because they (W and BO) never promised that they would be cost neutral. However Cheney did make that promise about Iraq. As far as Libya? I'm more pissed about that than Iraq. Gaddafi was on our side. Why did we care what he did to his own? And if we were going to get our panties in a twist over repressive regimes, why not Syria, they are actually a huge threat and have been for decades. I could get behind air strikes on Damascus. But Tripoli? WTF? Anyway, here are the facts calling BS on Wolfowitz's and the White House's assertions that Iraq would pay for its own reconstruction.
FQ13
PRE-WAR OIL REVENUE ESTIMATES
CLAIM: �The oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years�We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.� � Paul Wolfowitz, [Congressional Testimony, 3/27/03]
CLAIM: �Iraq, unlike Afghanistan, is a rather wealthy country. Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction.� � White House Spokesman Ari Fleischer, 2/18/03
FACT: International Oil Daily reported on 9/23/03 that Paul Bremer said that current and future oil revenues will be insufficient for rebuilding Iraq � despite the Administration's pre-war promises.
FACT: The WSJ reported on 9/5/03 that the Administration's oil estimates were �predicated on aggressively optimistic assumptions.�
FACT: While Bremer told Oil Daily that �Iraqi oil infrastructure was much worse than we thought,� a March 2000 report by the U.N. clearly said Iraq oil would be insufficient. The report said the Iraqi oil industry was �lamentable� and that the decline was �accelerating.� Roger Dowan of PFC Energy told NPR on 9/11/03 that the U.N. study the �made very clear that actually the facilities and the capacity to produce oil in Iraq� were far less than the Administration was portraying.
FACT: The NY Times reported on 10/5/03 �The Bush administration's optimistic statements earlier this year that Iraq's oil wealth, not American taxpayers, would cover most of the cost of rebuilding Iraq were at odds with a bleaker assessment of a government task force secretly established last fall to study Iraq's oil industry.�
Cheney isn't mentioned or quoted once, what is your point ???
-
Cheney was the one who drew the short straw and was sent out to sell the idea originally. The posts cited quoted lesser officials. The point was that the only reason I mentioned Iraq was because of this claim, regardless of who was making it. If you think I've forgiven BO over Libya, you are wrong.
FQ13
-
This is like your "Pink gun" post, you should use less ambiguous cites.