Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Credo Mobile

HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy

Regulatory Policy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

Demanding a federal budget that is fair, responsible, and meets our nation's priorities

Home :  Federal Budget & Tax : 
Federal Budget & Tax:      News     Blog     Background    



Wednesday, January 02, 2008

Bring The Money Home

The Bush administration has consistently tried to make the war in Iraq seem like a costless effort. But we pay for every dollar spent in Iraq, particularly in terms of opportunity costs. Every dollar spent in Iraq is lost potential spending in domestic programs.

This is one reason it's important that John Edwards, a Democratic candidate for president, today promised to all but end the US presence in Iraq in less than a year if elected. Ballpark estimate of the fiscal consequences of doing this: it'd save $100 billion a year, which could and should free up money to put towards domestic priorities. Other candidates have made similar pledges.

The money is badly needed. According to the Wall Street Journal ($) today, allowing the Bush tax cuts for the very rich to expire would only bring in about $50 billion a year. Other proposals for closing tax loopholes and enforcing tax laws better would help, too, but I'm skeptical that we're talking about an increase in revenue that would finance the many new spending projects Democratic candidates have proposed. And Congress still doesn't want to touch tax rate increases with a ten-foot poll.

Of course, deficit-financing new spending is a viable way to put programs in action, but there's only so much of that be done in a sustainable way. Reduced war spending opens up new opportunities for domestic spending on top of what can be borrowed.

War spending is a trade-off, like any other kind of spending. Whoever's president will probably have to take significant resources out of the Iraq war to pay for new domestic spending. And the more money that's not being spent in Iraq, the more that could be spent here.






Entries by Theme

All Themes

Appropriations & Spending

Federal Tax Policy

Income/Wealth Inequality

Budget Projections

Government Performance

Estate Tax

State Fiscal Policy

Watcher

Entitlements

Budget Process

Debt & Deficit

Oversight & Enforcement

Transparency

Privatization

Contact Us

Most Recent Entries for Federal Budget & Tax

Maybe It's the Money

More Secrecy Won't Help David

Notes from the Economy: Unemployment Insurance Claims

McCain and Obama on Outsourcing Government

The Best Laid Plans

Earmarks Declining? Not So Fast...

CHN Hosting Prep Webinar on Census Poverty Data Release

The $18 Trillion Mortgage

More on DCAA Dysfunction

Bush Administration Backs Off SCHIP Restrictions

Archived Entries for Appropriations & Spending

August

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

July, 2006

June, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

March, 2006

February, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

May, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004

October, 2004

September, 2004

August, 2004

July, 2004

June, 2004

May, 2004

April, 2004

March, 2004

February, 2004

January, 2004

December, 2003

November, 2003

September, 2003

August, 2003

July, 2003