An interesting item was on the NY Times website regarding sudden turnarounds in the Bush administration’s decisions to cut funding to various programs. NY Times Article Link

THEN: Bush proposed cutting Community Oriented Policing Services program by 87%.
NOW: Justice Dept. announces award of $47 million to same program.

THEN: Bush proposed ending grants that provide health coverage to people without health insurance.
NOW: Bush administration awarding $11.7 in grants for 30 states to provide health coverage to people without health insurance.

THEN: Bush proposed cutting state budgets for defibrillators.
NOW: Bush administration announces it is providing $11.6 million so that states can buy defibrillators.

THEN: Bush urged Congress to abolish a university program to train Blacks and Hispanics as doctors, dentists and pharmacists.
NOW: Bush administration awarding $16 million to 11 universities for said program.

THEN: Bush administration tries to cut rural health program by 72%.
NOW: Bush administration awarding $3.1 million in grants to rural health program.

Is the fact that the Bush administration is bragging about funding programs they originally intended to cut a deliberate political move in an election year to divert attention from all the bad news coming out of Iraq and put them in a more positive light?

If you don’t think so, why not?

If you do think so, do you think the public will buy it?

Do you think this an unacceptable mixing of policy and politics?

Personally, I find it kind of cheesy – like the guy in the office that nobody likes who is always trying to take credit for someone else’s work and is against something until the boss is for it, when he switches opinions.

Is the fact that the Bush administration is bragging about funding programs they originally intended to cut a deliberate political move in an election year to divert attention from all the bad news coming out of Iraq and put them in a more positive light?
I think this is independent of the the Iraq issues and simply a president taking advantage of the spoils of incumbency and using pork barrel politics in an election year. I suspect this is pretty common practice.

If you don’t think so, why not?
See above.

If you do think so, do you think the public will buy it?
Hard to say. I do think people vote more about issues that effect their pocketbook and feelings of security than whether a new base is funded or money is added to put more cops on the street.

Do you think this an unacceptable mixing of policy and politics?
Not really. I do think that Kerry should seize on stuff like this and call it out for the hypocrisy that it is but all is fair in love and election year politics. Lets just say that if the roles were reversed, Karl Rove would be foaming at the mouth

Doc

Well, I think it’s a bit of both shameless politicking and shrewd strategy, certainly nothing new for an incumbent running for re-election that’s behind in the polls.

The plus side for the GOP is they can now say they care about social programs and it appears they’ve hit several key demographics with this sudden change of heart. The negative is now the Kerry camp could throw the ‘flip-flopping’ back to the Bush camp and identify this as nothing more than pandering for votes.

I really don’t think it’s unacceptable, we now have citizens that will benefit from these programs and most do look like they are for worthy causes.

My immediate reaction when looking at these is the dollar amount of the grants. Other than the community policing policy, the rest are small potatoes. In a former job I administered federal grants for school systems and it’s amazing how little of the dollars actually make it to the cause.

<div><table width='50%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' style='border: 1px solid black' align='center'><tr><td class='maintitle'> Topic closed...</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Reason: Duplicate topic.<br /><br />Recommended action: Please use the search feature to locate a similar topic. If you are unable to find a similar topic, please contact the staff member who closed the topic by clicking the PM button below this post.<br /><br />Helpful links:<br /> - Simple Search<br /> - Advanced Search<br /> - Starting New Topics<br /> - Survival Guide<br /> - The Rules<br /> - Staff Directory<br /></td></tr><tr><td class='darkrow1'><div align='center'>Note: This is an automated response.</div></td></tr></table></div>

Most of these questions can be debated in this already existing thread: Unfunded Mandates - please join us there.