Military Spending Raises Questions

Lawmakers: Bush Bypassed Congress

When Rep. David L. Hobson (R-Ohio) went on an inspection trip to several Persian Gulf countries in the summer of 2002, he was dazzled by the state-of-the-art command centers, airstrips and other facilities being built there for the U.S. military.

But he was also troubled. Some of what he saw or learned from military briefers had not been approved by the House Appropriations Committee panel on military construction, which he then chaired. "I knew I didn't have that kind of money," he quipped recently.

Hobson's inquiries ultimately led to a modest tightening of controls over the Pentagon's ability to move money between military accounts without prior approval from Congress. But the episode has sparked concerns on the part of some lawmakers that the Bush administration largely bypassed Congress as it expanded installations in the Persian Gulf region before the war with Iraq.

President Bush has acknowledged that months before Congress voted an Iraq war resolution in October 2002, he approved about 30 projects in Kuwait that helped set the stage for war, with "no real knowledge or involvement" of Congress, according to "Plan of Attack," a new book by Bob Woodward, an assistant managing editor at The Washington Post.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15749-2004May10.html

a mere facade in the emerging dictatorship.

that states that only Congress can allocate funds?

here's an excerpt from FAUX (where they have icky spin control), but it pretty well lays out the facts:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,117609,00.html

Another controversial item in the Woodward book is a statement that the president authorized shifting $700 million from Afghanistan to be used for the Iraq war. Such a move would have violated the budgetary authority granted the administration by the Congress.

"Congress, which is supposed to control the purse strings, had no real knowledge or involvement, had not even been notified that the Pentagon wanted to re-program money," the book reads.

A senior budget official at the Pentagon said Woodward was misguided in his statement. In July of 2002, Gen. Tommy Franks, head of U.S. Central Command (search), requested $750 million for "contingency planning" for possible Iraq operations.

The Pentagon official said the request was reviewed and $178 million was provided under conditions applied for counterterrorism spending authorized after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. The rest was not provided until after October 2002, when Congress gave Bush permission to use force in Iraq.

or else once you are out of office, you won't have any friends. Screw the soldiers, we have plenty of them . . . we are a capitalistic society and profit, profit, and profit comes above everything, including human life, human dignity, humane treatment. Oh, but God has chosen Dubya to be the "war" president for now. He wants 25 Billion for our troops so they can have all their weaponry and amour. Bullshit . . . Halliburtin and Bechtel gave first quarter raises and in turn the lawless mercenaries over there demanded one too or else. After all, they have no rule of law to follow, do they?????

I called today. I told them, they could stop hiring mercenaries at exorbinate salaries, bring troops home, and get rid of Bush. He has wasted enough of our money.

I also called and told them to read the Amnestyusa.org open letter to Bush and the red cross report which said the TORTURE was widespread and repeatedly reported over the last two years by both groups.

But I live in a RW repub state....

smaller the budget -- say, the parks department of your local municipality -- the tighter the accounting. And the bigger the authority and the greater the budget -- say, the Department of Defense of the United States -- the laxer the accounting.

Some strange accounting law of inverse proportion?