Skip ahead to page content

federal_budget_and_spending.jpg

109th Congress: The year-end report

December 21, 2005 | By Nathaniel Ward

 

Congress has all but ended its 2005 session, so I thought I would quickly review how our leaders fared this year.

What went right

It was not a strong year, but there were some bright spots from Congress. Our elected representatives

  • Finally opened the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling—which Heritage has been pushing for some time *
  • Put in place a system to reimburse Katrina refugees who sent their children to private schools—following Heritage recommendations
  • Passed a resolution saying American troops should not withdraw from Iraq until victory is achieved—as Heritage has been saying all along *
  • Extended the 2003 capital gains and dividend tax cuts that have spurred the recovery, a Heritage priority *
  • Crafted a preliminary border security plan, which Heritage believes is essential to a comprehensive immigration and border security reform *
  • Cut the growth in certain federal programs, saving $39 billion over five years, despite intense liberal opposition *
  • Enacted bankruptcy reforms to prevent abuse
  • Lifted some artificial barriers to commerce with Central and South America through the CAFTA agreement—per Heritage’s recommendations
  • Made one percent across-the-board cuts in defense appropriations to offset Katrina spending—in line with Heritage’s money-saving recommendations *
  • Went into recess not only in August but for part of December as well, ensuring nothing untoward would happen while they were out of town

* Items passed by the House but not yet by the Senate (at the time this e-mail was being prepared)

What went wrong

Then there’s the bad news. Over the past year, Congress

  • Increased spending by eight percent over 2004 levels, to $22,000 per household
  • Allowed key provisions of the Patriot Act to expire, against Heritage’s advice, weakening America’s fight against terrorist organizations
  • Introduced numerous proposals to enact an amnesty for illegal aliens, which Heritage believes is wrong for law and order and wrong for America
  • Failed to permanently eliminate the death tax as Heritage suggested, bringing us another year closer to its return
  • Passed bloated transportation ($286 billion) and energy bills ($80 billion), both weighed down with billions in pork-barrel handouts to special interests
  • Failed to reform Social Security as Heritage suggested, deferring the inevitable reforms for at least another year—and saddling future generations with the cost ($25 trillion over 75 years)
  • Ignored Heritage’s recommendations and let the unaffordable Medicare drug benefit ($80 billion over two years) start as scheduled, granting the government a virtual monopoly on prescription drug coverage for seniors
  • Failed to make the dividend and capital gains tax cuts permanent, as Heritage proposed

Hope for next year

As the year went on, Congress seemed to grow increasingly aware of its big-spending ways, especially after Hurricane Katrina made much of the earlier spending seem frivolous.

While The Heritage Foundation called on Congress to make strong cuts to entitlement spending, several Senators and Representatives jumped on the fiscal responsibility bandwagon. The national press reported constantly about the infamous “bridge to nowhere” in Alaska, with coverage in Reader’s Digest and as the cover story of Parade Magazine. Seven senators formed the Fiscal Watch Team, which proposed common-sense measures to pay for Katrina relief—including delaying the Medicare drug benefit. Even, liberal Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) jumped on the anti-pork bandwagon.

So the momentum—and, of course, the truth—is on our side going into 2006.

But we need your help if we are to tell Congress the importance of being fiscally responsible. Visit our Activist toolkit and get involved!

Protecting terrorists’ privacy

Last Friday was a bad day in the domestic front of the war against terrorism.

First, The New York Times decided to run an article outlining purported administration abuses. Under White House orders, the paper revealed, the National Security Agency has intercepted phone calls between suspected terrorists and their contacts overseas. As The Wall Street Journal explained, though, this practice is hardly new and certainly not inconsistent with longstanding national security procedures. Nevertheless, the liberal media rejoiced in the opportunity to launch another broadside against the White House.

And the timing couldn’t be better: the article ran on the same day key parts of the Patriot Act, America’s primary terrorism intelligence law, were scheduled to be renewed in the Senate. So Senate liberals filibustered the Patriot Act extension. The expiring measures had updated existing laws to account for new technology like cell phones and e-mail, and applied to terrorism investigations the same tools used to investigate the Mafia and drug rings.

Objections, typically, were based on widespread myths about what the Patriot Act did and didn’t do.

The name game

Last time, I noted that Congress tried to name two federal office buildings after current lawmakers. I asked readers for their thoughts on naming the two buildings.

Reader R. Hill proposed that one of the buildings be named for the late Sen. William Proxmire (D-WI), whose “Golden Fleece Award” celebrated the most ridiculous Congressional expenditures.

Reader Charles Ehrenpreis wrote: “Instead of naming the two buildings after two specific senators, why not name them after the entire Congress by naming the 2 buildings ‘Tax’ and ‘Spend,’ respectively?”

Many thanks for all your suggestions.

In other news

    Nathaniel Ward is the Editor of MyHeritage.org—a website for members and supporters of The Heritage Foundation.