Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Bush Shortchanges US Police

Posted by Paddy , The Political Carnival at 3:26 PM on May 28, 2008.


Bush wants $600 million for Iraq police; but cuts aid to U.S. cops.
pennies

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Not my headline, McClatchy's. As the protesters said today, "Endless War, End This War".

WASHINGTON — At the same time the Bush administration has been pushing for deep cuts in a popular crime-fighting program for states and cities, the White House has been fighting for approval of $603 million for the Iraqi police.

The White House earlier this year proposed slashing the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program, which helps local law enforcement officials deal with violent crime and serious offenders, to $200 million in the next fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.

In 2002, the year before the Iraq war, the program received $900 million.

The administration and the Democratic-controlled Congress are headed for a showdown over the domestic money, probably next month. When the Senate last week passed the emergency Iraq war funding bill, it allotted an immediate $490 million for the domestic grants while keeping the Iraqi police funds intact.

The House is expected to consider the package when it returns from its Memorial Day recess next week. But the domestic grants are the kind of spending that's causing Bush to threaten a veto.


Yep, you read that right. We're freaking MADE of money if it benefits Iraq, but can't be bothered to pony up the cash to protect our own cities. I'm surprised they haven't contracted the local police forces out to Blackwater yet.


Is Palin a Step Backwards for Women in Power?
Sarah Palin is a milestone, for we achieve true gender equality when an incompetent woman goes as far as an incompetent man.
Post by Suzanne Braun Levine. September 5, 2008.
Bush's White House Spying on Iraqi Prime Minister
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino wants to make it clear, the White House IS NOT denying spying on Maliki.
Post by Amanda. September 5, 2008.
Fox News: 'McCain's TV Commercials Contain ... Out-Right Lies'
Wait, we're seriously talking about Fox News? The Fox News?
Post by Steve Benen. September 5, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
less money for body armor
Posted by: meetmeineleusis on May 28, 2008 8:00 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
assault rifles, APCs, battering rams, tear gas, and flash bangs for our already overmilitarized police?

clouds and silver linings

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: less money for body armor Posted by: tomwagner
Cripple our Armed Services and Our Home Town Cops and ...
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 29, 2008 3:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The private 'Security Firms' walk right in. Gee we can't afford to pay fro training new police officers, it's not 'cost effective' How about we just Hire a Private Company to handle the City Streets from now on- 'More Cost Effective'???? So all those Atrocities at the hands of Blackwater will soon be coming to a Town Near YOU!
This is NOT the 'Free Market' this is corporationism, the Antithesis of a Real Free market. Consider ALL the other Areas which have fallen into the hands of these Profiteers- Heckova Job Ah?
How much more Gutting of the part of the Oathe stating a Public Servant will 'Protect & Defend' are we going to allow them to disregard, undermine, destroy???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Apply simple economic theory here!
Posted by: chuckjs on May 29, 2008 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And from that I have determined that GWB missed the lecture on economies of scale. Was the toppling of one man, who wasn't near the threat he was made out to be, worth the complete destruction of one country and it's people as well as bringing your own country to near collapse.

And now that same president, who continually tells you everything he does is for your protection, sends 2/3 of 900 million dollars to another country to fight their crime problem. A crime problem that does not affect one Americam citizen on American soil. And leaves his own citizens 1/3 of that money for their crime prevention.

So here are a couple of questions for those of you who believe this bullshit administration. Why wasn't this $603 million given to say Columbia for the "war on drugs"? If the money was sent there, then that would have an actual effect on crime in America by stemming the flow of drugs into the country. Or better yet why not Afghanistan? You remember that country don't you. That same country, that had a net export of 0 on heroin in 2002, has become, since the US invasion and continuing NATO occupation, the number one net exporter of Heroin world wide? Where is the $600 million to fight the "war on Drugs" in Afghanistan let alone the War on terror. How the hell do you think the Taliban fund themselves? It sure as hell ain't from Iran.

I am also sure that if Paul Bremmner hadn't dissolved most of the Iraqi social structure, and the bush war machine hadn't destroyed most of the countries infrastructure, there would still be hundreds of thousands of gainfully employed Iraqi's paying taxes to the new government and helping pay their own way on crime prevention.

I am also sure that if Iraq were to receive IT'S entire share of the profits from IT'S oil rather than them getting a small percentage of it's worth in the form of royalty payments from mega American corporations you would not need to send them any money at all. How in the hell can there be a need to send money to a country with the third largest oil reserves in the world, especially when oil is selling at record prices?

But I am sure that none of that matters and all are irrelevant points, if your a Bushie corporatist. To hell with the consequnces lets "GET Saddam and his oil"

Kind of reminds me of kindergarden where uneducated children can be manipulated to believe anything.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just shows to go ya
Posted by: 2dogarage on May 29, 2008 9:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Homeland security isn't an issue. Never was.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is our biggest threat ?
Posted by: rafey on May 29, 2008 1:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Considering that the greatest threat to our nation's survival is the growing numbers of deaths related to drug-related gang killings and the plethora of weapons on the streets of the U.S., the numbers of innocent lives lost here far our number those in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere combined. And we are left with fewer and fewer capable personel to deal witht he situation. Threats from so-called terrorists are less than 1%, while threats from within our borders directly or indirectly resulting from drug addiction is nearing 100%for every U.S. citizen. That is not to mention the annual cost which, in fact, is greater than the cost of the Iraq occupation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

just how many levels of policing do you people need?
Posted by: Bearzerker on May 30, 2008 12:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... and is their truly any security at the end of a barrel?

Americans should seriously consider folding the ATF/DEA/Homeland Security/ICE and any other federal policing force into one coextensive force.

reducing crime will reduce legal gridlock and free up needed resources...

how can you do this... simply by ending prohibition!

just imagine the savings to the taxpayer!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]