AS DONATIONS are pouring into various organizations for hurricane relief, the grim reality sets in that still more money will be needed for these efforts. The U.S. government is preparing at least a $200 billion dollar relief effort across the Gulf Coast. This legislation has placed the president and Congress into a startling dilemma. Where is this money going to come from? In the interest of all parties, the administration needs to display some flexibility in its Iraq policy to help fund the hurricane relief efforts.
President Bush has already vaguely addressed the question, saying "We've got a job to defend this country in the war on terror, and we've got a job to bring aid and comfort to the people of the Gulf Coast, and we'll do both. We've got plenty of resources to do both." Upon looking at the facts, one has to wonder if this confidence is warranted.
The government has several options at its disposal to handle hurricane relief. Simply, the government could raise taxes to help pay for these expenditures. Since the administration is well-known for its large tax cuts, this option remains unlikely. Alternatively, it could use a large portion of the budget on Iraq and hurricane relief, which could cause a large deficit or the termination of federal programs across the nation. Judging by President Bush's response, this seems to be the direction the nation is heading toward.
This option presents the best image for the administration. By keeping troops in Iraq and funding hurricane relief, the majority of the public will be unaware of what is being sacrificed. This situation is unacceptable and will cause long-term harm to our nation.
The federal government ran a deficit of over $400 billion in 2004, and these deficits have only been growing in the last several years. In response, President Bush has vowed to cut the deficit in half by 2009. The budget for these upcoming years will be hotly contested. With seemingly every dollar debated, finding money for hurricane relief will be no simple task. With the U.S. debt already estimated at over $7.9 trillion by the Bureau of the Public Debt, we cannot afford to have escalating deficits every year. It will burden generations for years to come and will downgrade America's position in the world over time.
By retaining forces in Iraq and passing legislation for hurricane relief, cuts in federal programs could occur. However, these cuts will be made in places outside the public eye, as cuts like these have been in the past. In order to help fund the war in Iraq, New Orleans was only allocated $82 million on construction projects in fiscal year 2005, down from $147 million in 2001. Many unfunded projects included hurricane defense measures, such as widening drainage canals or building levees in unprotected areas. The repercussions of these cuts are now being felt along the Gulf Coast. Judging by Bush's proposals, new cuts would affect education, healthcare and even missile defense programs.
Instead of this option, the administration should choose to move some resources outside of Iraq to help fund hurricane relief. This money can help alleviate the blow that other programs would have to endure otherwise. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it costs roughly $9 million per month to "prosecute" a war in Iraq. An AP-Ipsos poll concluded that two-thirds of Americans believe the government is spending too much in Iraq.
Pulling resources from Iraq in the coming months makes sense both economically and politically. Economically, the resources can be used to help rebuild the Gulf Coast and aid the people of New Orleans that are scattered across the country. Politically, the United States has an obligation to remove troops as Iraqis elect new officials in October and December. Iraq is a sovereign nation that was promised removal of troops once a government was in place. The public favors this removal of troops, as more and more national polls demonstrate. Through this logic, it would not be admitting failure, as some have suggested, by beginning to remove troops from Iraq. A gradual removal of troops would help to keep order, but would also give the nation additional economic flexibility.
This fiscal dilemma will continue to haunt us for the years to come if the current policy remains intact. Many programs could take cuts, causing major problems down the line, or an even larger deficit could mount. Former President Bill Clinton was critical of the situation on ABC's This Week, stating, "Every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina and our tax cuts. We have never done this before." By beginning to pull resources from Iraq to help fund domestic concerns, we can end this disturbing new trend before it causes unthinkable damage.
Rajesh Jain is a Cavalier Daily Viewpoint writer.
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 3 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
