$45o BILLION
 

White House Admits Record Deficit
55 minutes ago Add Top Stories - Reuters to My Yahoo!

By Adam Entous

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House expects the federal budget deficit to balloon to a record high of more than $450 billion this fiscal year, but pledged for the first time to cut it in half "over the next few years." :eek: :eek:

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...03_graphic.gif

Democrats accused President Bush (news - web sites) of using rosy economic assumptions to understate the magnitude of a budget gap approaching the half-trillion-dollar mark for the first time.


The White House countered that the budget deficit -- which grew by $150 billion from the administration's own forecast five months ago -- was "manageable" and reflected economic and national security priorities following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.


The new projections include initial costs from the war in Iraq (news - web sites) as well as Bush's sweeping tax cuts.


"The deficit certainly remains a concern, but it is one that is manageable and it is one that we are addressing," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.


He said the administration would press Congress to hold the line on spending and expected the economy to grow "stronger in the coming year," and issued a new pledge: "Over the next few years, we will cut this deficit in half."


Military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan (news - web sites) have cost roughly $4.8 billion a month -- $58 billion on an annual basis -- which is well over initial estimates.


These war costs, plus the weaker than expected economy and the tax cuts, forced the White House to revise its budget forecasts from February, when it expected a deficit of $304 billion for the current fiscal year and $307 billion next year.


Underscoring the sharp reversal in the U.S. fiscal position, White House and congressional analysts had as recently as 2001 predicted 10-year budget surpluses of up to $5.6 trillion. Many analysts now expect massive deficits through 2013.


Rising deficits have yet to become a major political issue outside Washington, but some analysts believe that will change if they keep climbing ahead of the 2004 presidential election.


"We are drifting into bigger and bigger deficits and what I find alarming is that neither party is willing to give up its political priorities to do anything about it," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a balanced budget advocacy group.


BEST FACE

But the White House sought to put the best possible face on the bleak budget news.

At more than $450 billion, the new deficit would eclipse the previous record of $290 billion in 1992 when Bush's father was president.

The U.S. government enjoyed four straight years of budget surpluses between 1998 and 2001.

"I think people understand that we had a recession, we had lower revenues and a war on terrorism that led to the deficit coming back," McClellan said, but he added: "It is not something that is harming the economy right now."

Democrats countered that the budget deficit was approaching crisis levels not seen since the Reagan administration, and blamed Bush's tax cuts.

"President Bush is repeating two dangerous habits: misleading the American people and ducking responsibility for his mistakes," said Democratic presidential hopeful Joseph Lieberman, a senator from Connecticut.

"As bad as the budget is going to appear, it's actually worse," said the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Budget Committee, Rep. John Spratt (news, bio, voting record) of South Carolina.

Democrats and some analysts say that when revenue from Social Security (news - web sites) is set aside, the actual deficit could approach $600 billion, or 5.5 percent of gross domestic product, one of the highest since World War II.

ugh. WHAT is Bush DOING???

:rolleyes: Mmmmph-Mmmmph-Mmmmmph!

Dag! :eek: :eek:

$450 billion????


http://www.dusko.net/peanuts/pictures/002.jpg

CLASSIC!!

When 'Bush 41' an Ronald Reagan were in office, we seemed to have a large deficit during those terms as well. Frankly, I'm not surprised. :rolleyes:


Everyone, just make sure that you go to the polls next year and VOTE and VOTE enough so there will not be any margin to allow cheating... and as my Grandma would say, "make sho that yo papis (papers) is in order and have yo votin' card witch you when ya go so these 'ol fools cain't do nuthin' witch ya"...

first the lies about the nuclear weapons in Iraq now this.

I sure hope people are taking notes for the next presidential election............:mad:

God Bless us all if Bush makes into office another 4 years..

If so, I'm moving to Canada...

at least there they don't have a phony "War On Drugs" to put people of color in jail.

We need to vote!! That's so pertinent. Bush shouldn't have been in office in the first place. I can't stand him!

Please everyone get out there and vote. Every election is important and your vote counts no matter how much you think it do not. I do think the country need to get rid of the Electoral College.

Yeah the Electorial College IMO is not needed and the the reason why we are in this mess.

The problem is we don't have someone on the democrat side that really stands out. For me, the only one I like is John Kerry. I really wish Gore or McCain would run again.:(

The purpose of the electoral college was to ensure that states with small populations would have some representation in electing a president and that regional favorite "sons" wouldn't win due to lack of information about other candidates.

But how would small state populations receive some representation when each state get electors based on the # of senators (2) and the # of house of representatives (this # is based on a state's population). I could understand back during the 1700's using electoral college, but now with the technology advances, we should use popular vote to elect a president. We use the popular vote for all other elected offices.

Where's BILL?!!!!!!
We had a SURPLUS with his crew!!!!!