Post by bot on Jun 2, 2004 3:19:54 GMT -5
June 1, 2004, 10:58PM
U.S. has marked $119.4 billion for two years in Iraq
Senate Dems point to domestic needs
By ALAN FRAM
Associated Press
www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2604187
WASHINGTON -- Even by Washington standards, the $119.4 billion that President Bush and Congress have provided for the first two years of the war in Iraq is real money.
Though a tiny fraction of overall federal spending, the figure is huge in other ways. It dwarfs the $100 million that could hire 2,500 more airport security screeners, the $500 million that could add 69,400 more children to Head Start, the $1 billion that would let 160,000 more low-income families keep federal rent subsidies, Senate Democrats say. Or it could reduce the runaway federal deficit.
The $119.4 billion total, compiled by the White House Office of Management and Budget, is the administration's most comprehensive tally of the war's financial costs. Of the total, $97.2 billion has been for military operations, $21.2 billion for rebuilding Iraq's economy and government, and $1 billion for U.S. administrative expenses there.
Congress approved the money over the past 1 1/2 years with overwhelming votes, and few lawmakers doubt its need. But many of them say it soaks up dollars that other parts of the $2.4 trillion budget could use, from education initiatives to tax cuts and more.
"When you integrate Iraqi spending, which is necessary, with the effort to control spending, it puts more pressure on you to make harder choices," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "If you can name one part of government immune from this, I'd like to know."
If not used for war, the money could take a bite out of the government's runaway annual deficits, which are expected to set a record this year exceeding $400 billion. The $119.4 billion is four times this year's federal spending for biomedical research, 14 times what Washington will spend to clean the environment, 26 times the FBI's budget.
The total would also be enough to hand every Iraqi a check for $4,776 -- about eight times that country's average income.
Lawrence Lindsey, then the White House economic adviser, estimated before the Iraq war that it could cost $100 billion to $200 billion. Other administration officials called the figure far too large and argued that Iraq's oil revenues would let the country largely rebuild itself.
Instead, Lindsey's estimate has proved prophetic. Last week, the White House deputy budget chief, Joel Kaplan, blamed the war's costs on "unanticipated events" like the bad condition of Iraq's infrastructure and the prolonged violent resistance.
The Congressional Research Service, which provides nonpartisan analyses for lawmakers, has calculated Iraq costs for the first two years at $121.8 billion, using higher defense figures than the administration. Either way, the number will grow dramatically in the near future.
Bush has already requested an additional $25 billion for the U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, with the bulk of the money headed to Iraq. Administration officials have said they expect to seek more than $50 billion for 2005.
U.S. has marked $119.4 billion for two years in Iraq
Senate Dems point to domestic needs
By ALAN FRAM
Associated Press
www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2604187
WASHINGTON -- Even by Washington standards, the $119.4 billion that President Bush and Congress have provided for the first two years of the war in Iraq is real money.
Though a tiny fraction of overall federal spending, the figure is huge in other ways. It dwarfs the $100 million that could hire 2,500 more airport security screeners, the $500 million that could add 69,400 more children to Head Start, the $1 billion that would let 160,000 more low-income families keep federal rent subsidies, Senate Democrats say. Or it could reduce the runaway federal deficit.
The $119.4 billion total, compiled by the White House Office of Management and Budget, is the administration's most comprehensive tally of the war's financial costs. Of the total, $97.2 billion has been for military operations, $21.2 billion for rebuilding Iraq's economy and government, and $1 billion for U.S. administrative expenses there.
Congress approved the money over the past 1 1/2 years with overwhelming votes, and few lawmakers doubt its need. But many of them say it soaks up dollars that other parts of the $2.4 trillion budget could use, from education initiatives to tax cuts and more.
"When you integrate Iraqi spending, which is necessary, with the effort to control spending, it puts more pressure on you to make harder choices," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "If you can name one part of government immune from this, I'd like to know."
If not used for war, the money could take a bite out of the government's runaway annual deficits, which are expected to set a record this year exceeding $400 billion. The $119.4 billion is four times this year's federal spending for biomedical research, 14 times what Washington will spend to clean the environment, 26 times the FBI's budget.
The total would also be enough to hand every Iraqi a check for $4,776 -- about eight times that country's average income.
Lawrence Lindsey, then the White House economic adviser, estimated before the Iraq war that it could cost $100 billion to $200 billion. Other administration officials called the figure far too large and argued that Iraq's oil revenues would let the country largely rebuild itself.
Instead, Lindsey's estimate has proved prophetic. Last week, the White House deputy budget chief, Joel Kaplan, blamed the war's costs on "unanticipated events" like the bad condition of Iraq's infrastructure and the prolonged violent resistance.
The Congressional Research Service, which provides nonpartisan analyses for lawmakers, has calculated Iraq costs for the first two years at $121.8 billion, using higher defense figures than the administration. Either way, the number will grow dramatically in the near future.
Bush has already requested an additional $25 billion for the U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, with the bulk of the money headed to Iraq. Administration officials have said they expect to seek more than $50 billion for 2005.