Congress Approves $87.5 Billion Aid Package for War Effort - via voice vote

[CADsortaGUY]

Congress Approves $87.5 Billion Aid Package for War Effort

I find it interesting that they didn't want to have an official roll call vote and that there weren't many who actually showed up to vote on this. Byrd was the only "nay" vote. I wonder who showed up to actually vote...or wasn't this a "big deal" to some of them anymore. Byrd seems to be pretty consistant with his dissent though.(I can't believe I almost have to praise him on that) I wonder what the "candidates" had to say...or didn't they show up

CkG

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Congress Approves $87.5 Billion Aid Package for War Effort

I find it interesting that they didn't want to have an official roll call vote and that there weren't many who actually showed up to vote on this. Byrd was the only "nay" vote. I wonder who showed up to actually vote...or wasn't this a "big deal" to some of them anymore. Byrd seems to be pretty consistant with his dissent though.(I can't believe I almost have to praise him on that) I wonder what the "candidates" had to say...or didn't they show up

CkG

I find it even more interesting that Rummy and his troop underestimated the cost of waging this action by such large numbers that our Soldiers have been put unessecarily in harms way.

 

[Nitemare]

I can't believe they are making it a grant rather than a loan

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
I can't believe they are making it a grant rather than a loan

Making it a loan would almost ensure that Iraq never became a prosperous democracy rather than another failed 3rd world rathole. The administration has it 100% correct on that point, and I applaud them for standing firm on that point.

 

[GrGr]

Even I, anti-Bush that I am, can see that making this a loan would be selfdefeating. The Iraqi resentment towards having to "pay", with oil of course, for their "liberation" would negate any positive things the puppet regime left behind by the Bushies might try to accomplish.

 

[SuperTool]

It's good that the Iraqis won't have a lot of debt to worry about. Too bad us Americans will add half a trillion dollar debt a year. It's Ironic that Bush admin has to go to Iraq to practice some sanity in it's fiscal policies.
It's nice how this administration (FERC) stood by during the CA energy crisis, but is making sure Iraqis get their gas at 15 cents/gallon at US taxpayer expense.
It's nice how they are making sure every Iraqi gets vaccines and medicine, while the US population goes uninsured and unable to afford prescriptions.
It's just dandy how they are investing in Iraqi infrastructure and rebuilding schools, while our schools are in shameful disrepair.
Their policies in Iraq are 180 degree opposite of their policies here. They are warm and cuddly liberals in Iraq, but tough love conservatives here.
This Iraq issue is becoming a hot potato, no wonder almost none of our so called representatives want to be on record either voting for or against it.

 

[GrGr]

Bah, they already are on record for voting for the war against Iraq. Now they will have to face the music, and dance.

 

[Corn]

It's nice how they are making sure every Iraqi gets vaccines and medicine, while the US population goes uninsured and unable to afford prescriptions.

The "US population" is uninsured and unable to afford perscriptions? Preposterous of course! Not only that, but I must wonder what the level of medical care is like over in Iraq compared to even our own governmental entitlements given to those who cannot "afford" health insurance? What kind of medicines are we lavishing on the Iraqi people that people here cannot afford?

That bullet point is a joke.

It's just dandy how they are investing in Iraqi infrastructure and rebuilding schools, while our schools are in shameful disrepair.

Just to give some perspective, the Federal government alone spent over $20 billion in 2002 for elementary and secondary education alone! This is also a recurring "investment" every year, compared to the paltry 1 time expendature earmarked for Iraqi schools. Another preposterous comparison. Think our schools are crumbling? I wonder what the average Iraqi classroom looks like.

Ironically, I bet the Iraqi's will spend their educational dollars wisely, unlike how throwing money at our "crumbling" schools has only reaped what, more schools in disrepair?

That bullet point is also a joke.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Corn

It's nice how they are making sure every Iraqi gets vaccines and medicine, while the US population goes uninsured and unable to afford prescriptions.

The "US population" is uninsured and unable to afford perscriptions? Preposterous of course! Not only that, but I must wonder what the level of medical care is like over in Iraq compared to even our own governmental entitlements given to those who cannot "afford" health insurance? What kind of medicines are we lavishing on the Iraqi people that people here cannot afford?

That bullet point is a joke.

yeah, our seniors are going to Canada for the weather.

It's just dandy how they are investing in Iraqi infrastructure and rebuilding schools, while our schools are in shameful disrepair.

Just to give some perspective, the Federal government alone spent over $20 billion in 2002 for elementary and secondary education alone! This is also a recurring "investment" every year, compared to the paltry 1 time expendature earmarked for Iraqi schools. Another preposterous comparison. Think our schools are crumbling? I wonder what the average Iraqi classroom looks like.

Ironically, I bet the Iraqi's will spend their educational dollars wisely, unlike how throwing money at our "crumbling" schools has only reaped what, more schools in disrepair?
That bullet point is also a joke.

You must not be aware of the state of some public schools where the roofs are leaking and which haven't been painted in decades. 20 billion for what, 50 million students? what's that $40 per month. Stop the presses.

 

[mastertech01]

Good grief, look how much we spend each year maintaining our forces in Europe. Look how much we have expended for the past 60 years. Have we demanded that they repay this money? Hell no. In fact we spend enormous sums in reparations for maneuvers damages every year. Add up all the costs, the losses of equipment and personnel due to accidents etc and I bet it comes to one hell of a lot of cash on nations who dont even back us up when we ask for thier help.


Considering only 18+ billion goes toward rebuilding Iraq infrastructure we should consider this a drop in the bucket. Maintaining our forces over there is what the bulk of the money is going for. We should have double the force over there to ensure more security for the ones whom are there now. Bitching about money sure wont save lives.

Why do we need the FEDs to take care of our schools. If we really want better schools we need to spend more on local taxes and stop running to the polls to slam dunk any propositions that are laid up for a vote to improve our school systems. People want to piss and moan about 1/4 cent sales tax increase but want the FED to come running when the roof leaks in thier kids classrooms.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: mastertech01

Why do we need the FEDs to take care of our schools. If we really want better schools we need to spend more on local taxes and stop running to the polls to slam dunk any propositions that are laid up for a vote to improve our school systems. People want to piss and moan about 1/4 cent sales tax increase but want the FED to come running when the roof leaks in thier kids classrooms.

Amen to that.

CkG

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

It's nice how they are making sure every Iraqi gets vaccines and medicine, while the US population goes uninsured and unable to afford prescriptions.

Actually the UN and various NGOs were doing that task BEFORE and AFTER the US invasion. The Bushies would say fewer than 44million Americans don't have insurance . . . granted a much larger number cannot afford prescriptions.

Ironically, I bet the Iraqi's will spend their educational dollars wisely, unlike how throwing money at our "crumbling" schools has only reaped what, more schools in disrepair?

What makes you think Iraqis are making decisions. I've seen multiple references to how US contractors and elements of the CPA call virtually all of the shots. I doubt the Iraqis were advocating for buying 2.65/gal gasoline from Kuwait. Some wonk in the Bush administration cobbled together the list of Iraq "priorities" and costs. And ultimately such ignorant planning will produce a more expensive and less effective interventions. I forget . . . just how much of this funding goes into Bush or Rumsfeld slush fund that can be spent without oversight?

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: mastertech01

Why do we need the FEDs to take care of our schools. If we really want better schools we need to spend more on local taxes and stop running to the polls to slam dunk any propositions that are laid up for a vote to improve our school systems. People want to piss and moan about 1/4 cent sales tax increase but want the FED to come running when the roof leaks in thier kids classrooms.

Amen to that.

CkG

Well, some communities just couldn't generate enough local tax revenues to fund these things even if they wanted to.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: mastertech01

Why do we need the FEDs to take care of our schools. If we really want better schools we need to spend more on local taxes and stop running to the polls to slam dunk any propositions that are laid up for a vote to improve our school systems. People want to piss and moan about 1/4 cent sales tax increase but want the FED to come running when the roof leaks in thier kids classrooms.

Amen to that.

CkG

Well, some communities just couldn't generate enough local tax revenues to fund these things even if they wanted to.

I think most could.

 

[Ferocious]

I think the Feds only account for like 5% of local school funding in most cases.

I have no problem with making it a grant.

Most of these type of loans end up being a grant anyways.

 

[Moonbeam]

Voice vote, of course. Both parties are a pack of cowardly swine.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Voice vote, of course. Both parties are a pack of cowardly swine.

Oh heck.. they don't even need a vote... just do it.. It ain't my money anyhow.. it is yours! Well yours and Cad's so they can give it away to study the habits of swine in Iran for all I care. It is beyond my control and with this vibrant economy and job gains the 87 billion is just some small portion of the GNP anyhow as well..
I think I'm done wondering what Bush will do next or the Congress or the USSC. I'll wait till next year to start caring again as we elect a new House and third of the Senate and a new President. If we don't then I suggest you just kick back and let the good times roll.

 

[MonstaThrilla]

What isn't being reported in that article is that the "voice vote" was attended by a WHOPPING six senators, with Byrd the only voice of nay...

Where did I get this tidbit? From the only news source I trust anymore, the Daily Show....

 

[DealMonkey]

Right a "voice vote" so no one would have to be embarrassed by their voting record. Geeze. Yeah, it's too bad oil revenues in Iraq won't pay for the reconstruction. I recall some nimrods in our gov't floating that theory around...

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: Nitemare
I can't believe they are making it a grant rather than a loan

Making it a loan would almost ensure that Iraq never became a prosperous democracy rather than another failed 3rd world rathole. The administration has it 100% correct on that point, and I applaud them for standing firm on that point.

Iraq has a confirmed 112 billion barrels of oil and 220 billion more probable barrels. Saddam has squirreled away probably well over a billion. He has over a billion more in assets in Iraq. I doubt very seriously that they would be hurting. We have other matters to deal with at home, paying off the debt, hiring advisers to trim the fat on federal overspending, maybe even economic incentive for companies that use domestic workers rather than shipping the jobs overseas

 

[GrGr]

Another question is much of the $ 87 billion will end up in the pockets of those Bush backers and donors who were given the contracts to rebuild Iraq without competition.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: GrGr
Another question is much of the $ 87 billion will end up in the pockets of those Bush backers and donors who were given the contracts to rebuild Iraq without competition.

About the same as would have ended up going to the SAME companies if Gore were elected. These companies give to both candidates..

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: GrGr
Another question is much of the $ 87 billion will end up in the pockets of those Bush backers and donors who were given the contracts to rebuild Iraq without competition.

About the same as would have ended up going to the SAME companies if Gore were elected. These companies give to both candidates..

just curious about this issue, do we have a list somewhere on donations given by those companies to both bush and gore?

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: GrGr
Another question is much of the $ 87 billion will end up in the pockets of those Bush backers and donors who were given the contracts to rebuild Iraq without competition.

About the same as would have ended up going to the SAME companies if Gore were elected. These companies give to both candidates..

just curious about this issue, do we have a list somewhere on donations given by those companies to both bush and gore?

Let's just say they hedge their bets. I've seen the numbers and they give alot to both parties

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: Nitemare
I can't believe they are making it a grant rather than a loan

Making it a loan would almost ensure that Iraq never became a prosperous democracy rather than another failed 3rd world rathole. The administration has it 100% correct on that point, and I applaud them for standing firm on that point.

Iraq has a confirmed 112 billion barrels of oil and 220 billion more probable barrels. Saddam has squirreled away probably well over a billion. He has over a billion more in assets in Iraq. I doubt very seriously that they would be hurting. We have other matters to deal with at home, paying off the debt, hiring advisers to trim the fat on federal overspending, maybe even economic incentive for companies that use domestic workers rather than shipping the jobs overseas

We have already spent much of around 2 billion dollars in US currentcy Saddam and his cronies had squirelled around Iraq. The Iraqi central bank is very low on currency reserves, and the country has over 100billion dollars in foriegn debt not including war reperations from the first war.

Now that we are in the country the administration and industry experts are saying that it could be years before the Iraqi oil industry recovers the large amounts of capitol investments required to bring it back online in a profitable manner (contrary to what they said before the war).

Iraq has no ability anywhere in the forseeable future to pay of its debts, and we don't need to be piling more on.

The administration made the right call on this, and I can see them asking for more money next year which they should also get. IMHO