President George W. Bush presented his $2.4 trillion dollar

budget proposal to Congress Monday, focusing spending on winning

the war on terrorism, building the infrastructure of the Department

of Homeland Security and initiating policies for economic

recovery.

According to Bush, his proposed budget advances the nation’s top

three priorities.

During his speech, the president praised the military success in

the war on terror thus far while also calling for sustained

action.

“This nation has committed itself to the long war against

terror,” Bush said in his address. “And we will see the war to its

inevitable conclusion: the destruction of the terrorists.”

Along with the seven percent military spending increase,

homeland security will also receive an increase of 10 percent in

2005. The substantial increase in funds will be used most

specifically by the FBI for heightened security alerts against

terrorist attacks.

These increases, along with Bush’s economic recovery plan to

make the tax cuts of 2003 permanent, leave the president in a bind

with both the Democrats and Republicans in Congress. Many fiscal

conservatives think Bush’s plan for spending is irresponsible

during a time of large deficits.

“The president’s budget takes some good steps toward reforming

the broken budget process and restraining spending, but it doesn’t

nearly go far enough,” U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R ?WI, said in a press

release. Ryan is currently working on legislation to reform

government spending and create more accountability.

On the other hand, democrats like Ted Kennedy strongly oppose

the permanent tax cuts when spending for governmental programs is

being simultaneously eliminated according to the New York

Times.

While President Bush stressed the importance of economic reform

in his proposal, proponents say that his actions are unnecessary

for current economic conditions. UW professor in the La Follette

School of Public Affairs, Andrew Reschovsky, argued that Bush’s tax

cuts are detrimental to the economy in the long run.

“During this time when the country is successfully getting out

of a recession and the economy is looking increasingly prosperous,

permanent tax cuts are only going to break the growth and put us

into a tailspin when it comes to inflation and increasing interest

rates,” Reschovsky said.

Reschovsky also said if the Bush administration was serious

about increasing economic prosperity they would consider tax breaks

to the low-income bracket in order to spur increased spending and

saving.

While the 2004 budget was met with intense scrutiny in Congress,

it is said the current proposal will be met with just as much — if

not more. In an election year, Republicans are apprehensive of the

idea that Bush has cut spending on many domestic programs, causing

support for the president to lag during the election this fall.

Of the 13 cabinet-level agencies, seven of them will experience

decreases in funds if the proposal goes through the legislature as

is. The agencies with the largest reduction in funds are the

Agriculture and Environmental Protection Agencies.

With Bush’s emphasis on military and defense spending as well as

his permanent tax cut plan, he has little room for other spending

he had previously supported such as an overhaul of Medicaid.