Re: Foreign Aid Business
Just for a little edification,
Clinton FY 2000 Budget:
Line item 150, pg 284 Total International Aid, (non-Military)
1998 actual 7,157Billion
1999 estimate 7,828
2000 estimate 7,774
2001 estimate 7,774
2002 estimate 7,774
2003 estimate 7,774
2004 estimate 7,774
Bush 2006 budget Summary
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/sheets/25_12.xls (xls file)
I have excluded Iraq reconstruction and CPA line item for comparability
2004 Actual 12,519 Billion
2005 Estimate 12,906
2006 Estimate 13,128
2007 Estimate 13,427
2008 Estimate 13,737
2009 Estimate 14,042
2010 Estimate 14,364
Now, even idiots should be able to see substantial differences. (Ignoring the arguement of GDP, which, as I said before ignores tax loopholes that exist to encourage private giving, as opposed to high taxation and central government authority, a huge structural difference that is ignored in the GDP arguement.)
Bush’s actual expenditures exceeded what Clinton was planning to spend by 4.7 Billion, and represents a 60% increase over the Clinton projected budget. (Ahmadjee, you are using Clinton 2000 numbers in your Googled graph)
Clinton chose to freeze this line item budget prior to the election. (Remember, the FY 2000 really starts Oct 1 oct 1999. So that the Budget for 2000 is submitted to the Congress in Jan of 1999.)
So in rough terms the expenditures for these areas will have doubled under Bush. By the time you add in the debt relief, the increase is enormous. Is it enough? Apparently not for some people. But it does represent the largest increase in the history of this country.