Wednesday, April 25, 2007

President wants to Pay for his War? Finally!

Thanks to Michelle Malkin for the following quotations:

U.S. Congressman Mike Pence reportedly said, in part:
"The Democrat emergency supplemental appropriations bill is fiscally irresponsible ..."
"What the Democrat (sic) Congress has produced is a bill that violates the budget resolution that passed the House ..."
"While I am opposed to this bill based on its fiscal irresponsibility, ..."

Finally, someone who agrees with me about what Congress should do if President Bush decides to veto the bill that "gives" (from the pockets of future generations) money to properly train our troops and care for them after they are wounded. There is no question in my mind that the correct response to a veto is to pass a bill the "funds" the troops, with no other strings attached other than the requirement that it be revenue neutral, although I think it should also require that troops not be sent to war without proper training and resources to meet the mission, and that our Guard units not be diverted from their important duties at home. We must support our troops and safeguard our nation as well as protecting the Shiites in Iraq.

Similarly, U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich. said:
"Providing full funding for our troops in combat should be simple and straightforward."

Yes, it would be, but it would require a tax increase like the one that Congress imposed at the start of WW II. No one in the White House or in Congress, on either side, has had any inclination at all to sacrifice one penny to match the sacrifices made by some of my students. Last I looked, people like Hoekstra were against actually funding the war. They want to charge it to their grandkids like they have been doing for the last four years.

Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino says the President even seems to agree with me:
"The President calls on the Senate to quickly pass this legislation so the President can veto it and then work with the Congressional leadership on a clean bill that funds our troops while respecting the judgment of our military commanders and helping ensure the safety of the American people."

I also like the President's suggestion that Congress force the President to stop reducing the safety of the American people by sending our National Guard troops overseas. We need them to protect us during national disasters or, heaven forbid, an attack by one of our actual enemies. Its bad enough that President Bush cut and ran in the face of nuclear tests by North Korea because of a troop shortage in Iraq. We can't afford any more of that.

No comments: