0
   

Bush budget take from the needy and give to the rich.

 
 
au1929
 
Reply Thu 20 Feb, 2003 10:37 am
A Strange Budget Cut

By BOB HERBERT

Say it ain't so, Mr. President.
You might think that with the country gearing up for war this would be the wrong time ; absolutely the worst time ; to cut federal school aid for the children of men and women in the armed forces.
Nobody would do that, right? Right?
Alas.
Undeterred by the anxiety and hardships faced by youngsters whose parents may be heading overseas, and perhaps into combat, President Bush has proposed substantial cuts in the government's Impact Aid program, which provides badly needed funds to school districts that have a significant number of students from military families.
The program was established during the Truman administration. When a school district is in an area that has military installations or other types of federal property, it is cut off from a range of revenue sources ; residential, business and industrial property taxes, for example ; that would have been available if the land and facilities were privately owned and developed. The districts are still obligated, however, to provide schooling for children whose parents are stationed or work at such facilities.
Is this another example of Bush's compassionate conservatism.
Well I guess there is some justification, the government needs the money for another tax cut for the rich.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/20/opinion/20HERB.html?th
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 700 • Replies: 3
No top replies

 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Feb, 2003 02:16 pm
same old, same old.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Mar, 2008 02:36 pm
Wilso
truth hurts and absolute truth kills.
I wish you all the best for your views
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Mar, 2008 08:07 am
Bob Hebert wrote:
Under Mr. Bush's budget proposal, Impact Aid would continue for youngsters whose parents live on a military base, but not for those whose families live off base. This is a specious distinction that does not take into account the overall deficit in tax revenues and the special needs of military youngsters.


What is specious here is Mr. Hebert's thinking.

The entire purpose of the Imact Aid Program was to compensate communities for providing services to people that lived on Federal property since those commuintities can't legally collect any property taxes (which is how most schools are paid for in this country) from those people.

The "cut" proposed is to bring the program back to doing exactly what it is supposed to do. Military members that live off-base already pay property taxes if they own the property or if they lease/rent, the owner's of that property pay them.

Why should local communities be able to tax a military member directly and then collect impact aid from the government based on that person being a military member too?

I would also note that the military has always been a minor player in this program. It was never the major driving force for it. The big player was government provided housing projects where government agencies (like HUD) owned huge complexes and provided housing to thousands of people. Mr. Herbert's attempt to play this up as a "What are they doing to our service members?" tug at heart-strings is B.S..
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush budget take from the needy and give to the rich.
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/08/2024 at 06:04:41