Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (218258)	2/13/2007 6:12:26 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Congress passes ALL the laws that establish ALL the programs that the President is REQUIRED to administer. Not until the President signs them. Reagan wasn't chincy with the veto, he just never used it on an appropriations bill. And while the President might be required to spend, they can't make him. We've seen that happen in the last several years with Congress funding for new border agents and the Administration wouldn't fill the positions. Chertoff just recently annoyed Congress by suggesting that he wasn't going to build the fence on the US/Mexican border. Through the years, I've seen DoD have to turn money back into the Treasury because they haven't spent it. They do their best to spend it all, but sometimes they just can't get it all in. You watch this current budget proposal and when the appropriations bills are signed figure out the % change. It's small, it's always small. I'm confident you were also conned by the President's budget vs Actuals con game. That's where the President low balls the budget and submits supplementals. The con is that the President's Budget [without supplementals] is compared to the actuals [including supplementals] I wouldn't necessarily eliminate the Dept of Ed. I see primary and secondary schools are a function of the States, hence No child Left Behind was stupid and inappropriate. However, I do see a Federal role in University education [possibly community colleges since they are creeping into the University arena.] I view Universities as a national resources. Primary and secondary schools are a state resource. I'd toss out agricultural subsidies as well, but you might want to actually check to see if Agriculture does anything else. But no President can eliminate or downsize these agencies, only Congress can do this. A President can wipe out anything he wants that's discretionary in his proposed budget. He's not going to, but it's not because of Congress. You think ADM is going to make big political contributions to a Presidential candidate that vows to eliminate agricultural subsidies? You think maybe that ADM was all giggly when they heard President Bush promote ethanol?