Bush 2007 Budget cuts

Forums: Politics, Political, American Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

The EPA will take a hit by the proposed 2007 Bush budget.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/bw-wh/2006/feb/10/021001760.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - Grants to state and local governments for land and water conservation would be cut 40 percent, and money for the Environmental Protection Agency's network of libraries for scientists would be slashed severely under President Bush's proposed budget.

Early in his presidency, Bush called for restoring the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund to the full $900 million authorized by Congress. Last year, it was approved at $142 million. For 2007, he wants just $85 million in grants for creating and preserving non-federal parks, forest land and wildlife refuges, a 40 percent cut.

This seems to be an indication of how Bush views environmental issues. With climate change becoming a big issue lately, I don't feel this is a time to be cutting funding for EPA programs such as Land and Water Conservation funding. A 40% cut is too much. We seem to be headed in the wrong direction.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,130 • Replies: 10

No top replies

@tumbleweed cv,

Quote:

Early in his presidency, Bush called for restoring the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund to the full $900 million authorized by Congress.

By early, could that mean before the Afgan/Iraq wars and the unpresidented amount of huricanes?

Quote:

This seems to be an indication of how Bush views environmental issues.

Seems to be an indication to me means they are not sure or another reason? No proof!

Quote:

"This is the most troubling budget we've seen from this White House,"

Troubling for who, Liberals?

Quote:

I don't feel this is a time to be cutting funding for EPA programs such as Land and Water Conservation funding.

Win back the White House and you can change it, otherwise your just whining.

Quote:

A 40% cut is too much. We seem to be headed in the wrong direction.

You SEEM to use vague emotions when writing an opinion, I suggest using logic. In anycase to debate i need to know more then what you FEEL.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Drnaline wrote:

By early, could that mean before the Afgan/Iraq wars and the unpresidented amount of huricanes?

Seems to be an indication to me means they are not sure or another reason? No proof!

Troubling for who, Liberals?

Win back the White House and you can change it, otherwise your just whining.

You SEEM to use vague emotions when writing an opinion, I suggest using logic. In anycase to debate i need to know more then what you FEEL.

Those vage emotions you refer to are my interpretation of the artical that I refered to. You seem to offer more questions than contrasting facts. I'm open to suggestions on the statements. Constructive criticism would be a plus. I'm well aware of your personal views on any of my posts. You seem to disregard any statement I post as totally absurd. Up to this point I could care less, but it is distracting IMO.

Contrasting facts. Like why these cuts are a good thing would be helpful.

1 Reply

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed wrote:

Those vage emotions you refer to are my interpretation of the artical that I refered to. You seem to offer more questions than contrasting facts. I'm open to suggestions on the statements. Constructive criticism would be a plus. I'm well aware of your personal views on any of my posts. You seem to disregard any statement I post as totally absurd. Up to this point I could care less, but it is distracting IMO.

Contrasting facts. Like why these cuts are a good thing would be helpful.

The reason i mention it is because IMO you use alot of emotion to dictate your state of thinking is or logic. I offer up question so i may distinguish how you arrive at your thought pattern. I offer no contrasting facts for the simple reason that that you present none either. Just the specified emotion. Your emotional state does not make them facts. Just an opinion.

Quote:

You seem to disregard any statement I post as totally absurd.

Because they come from total emotion.

Quote:

Contrasting facts. Like why these cuts are a good thing would be helpful.

They we go with the emotional facts again. You have yet to prove they are bad. Some think other then opinion. Then i will state my case. Seem and Feel are not facts.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

The only solution I might suggest is to place me on your ignore list as I'm not familiar with your style of debate.

0 Replies

@tumbleweed cv,

I wish not to ignore you. Although many have put me on there ignore list. My concern is to learn your basis in fact as through the course of debate i have learned that many of the worlds problems come from decisions that were made through emotion. IMO when you allow emotion into the equation chances are the decision you are going to make it is going to be a wrong one. I equate it to the feminist movement, when in an arguement they seldom make sence. It always boils down to a few select words like, I, me, my, mine. Debate is a heavy discusion between persons providing they have common ground. I would like to further debate things but at this point we are still laying ground rules. As i'm sure you know when in an arguement with me or others you have had an experience with some one that is totally irrational. That irrashness comes from a total emotional state. To keep everything logical, emotion need to be left our of it. IMO The debate will never come to a conclusion untill that common ground is agreed upon. I know you think your right and you know i do to. But there is my side, yours, and then there is the truth. My goal is for both of us to agree on the truth. I am not ashamed of conceeding when i have been proved wrong, that is how i learned. At one point in time i would of agreed with you on many points, but today is a different day. You may decide to ignore me at one point but to this day i have never done it to someone else.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Being new to the forum, I'm not sure of the ground rules. I post on other forum like this all the time, with the same wording, and this is the first time I have had this problem. I'v never claimed to be a great debater, but a lot of the topics I'v discussed on here are the same topics I'm discussing on other forums with a different result, so I'm not sure what is different here.

Being a new poster here has it's drawbacks I guess.:sad:

1 Reply

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed wrote:

Being new to the forum, I'm not sure of the ground rules. I post on other forum like this all the time, with the same wording, and this is the first time I have had this problem. I'v never claimed to be a great debater, but a lot of the topics I'v discussed on here are the same topics I'm discussing on other forums with a different result, so I'm not sure what is different here.

Being a new poster here has it's drawbacks I guess.:sad:

Ground rules are according to the partys in the debate. I do not believe you are having a problem, just incountering different people an a new site. The difference being totally different people. I think that makes us an exception to the rule if you will. A good thing in my opinion. I have been schooled in debate by some tuff real scientists, my heading under my avatar is in reference to that. I got beat around quite abit by men alot smarter then me, but getting beat up enough you tend to learn something. I am a scientist only by moniker. By the time i felt sufficient, i too had a very thick skin. And used logic as a base of defence out of nessecity. If you would like some examples check this place out. http://www.corner-carvers.com/
It's an auto racing forum where a bunch of scientists hang out that like to race. Check out the Gerneral Discussion forum. Make sure and read the FAQ before posting. They are very picky.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Point taken. The discussion on the forum you refered to is a bit over my head. Very Happy

I'll go back in the shadows until I get a handle of how the discussion is conducted here. I simply saw a site that needed a few active posters. I threw up a few threads to contribute to starting discussions. I seem to be geared more toward discussion than knock down, drag out debate.

0 Replies

@tumbleweed cv,

^ no need to hide in the shadows. Smile

Bush 2007 Budget cuts

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know