Obama To Cut 121 Government Programs In 2010

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Barack, Budget, Money, Obama

First we heard about $100 million in cuts and now add another $17 billion to that total.

The drops in the bucket are getting bigger.

From Miami Herald:

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama plans to unveil Thursday a fiscal 2010 budget full of details on his plans to save as much as $17 billion by cutting – and in some cases ending – 121 government programs.

The goal, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, is “identifying and ending programs that are unneeded and don’t work.”

About half the savings would come from nondefense programs, and the rest from defense. Major cuts would include ending the Even Start program, which promotes family literacy, as well as a mine cleanup effort and the Education Department’s Paris attache.

The full list will be revealed Thursday, and it’s expected to include about 40 previously announced cuts, including the Pentagon’s bid to end production of the F-22 fighter jet program. It also will list an effort to eliminate the Resource Conservation and Development Program, which has provided such community leadership training since 1962.

Again, if this is just the start of trimming the fat, we could see much larger cuts down the road. And I’m sure most Americans would gladly give up even more government programs if it meant health care for all.

More as it develops…


This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 6th, 2009 and is filed under Barack, Budget, Money, Obama. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

11 Responses to “Obama To Cut 121 Government Programs In 2010”

  1. Trescml Says:

    Although I am in favor of cuts like this, these are only proposed cuts. Once Congress gets their hands on it few things will be actually cut.

    We need the equivalent of a base closing commission to come up with a package of cuts that get voted for together. Otherwise we will keep seeing things like antiquated tracking systems continue long after their usefulness not to mention wasted resources like a NASA center in West Virginia.

  2. cy Says:

    Wait, what’s wrong with NASA having a center in WV? Labor and real estate are dirt cheap there… I’d much rather them have a presence in Fairmont than have to expand in DC.

    Hell… Fairmont, WV makes Huntsville, AL look like New York, NY.

  3. Trescml Says:

    There is tons of overhead associated with having a small facility that just happens to be in the district of the chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science. NASA has centers with open space that would be a more efficient use of money. The overhead is far greater than the slight pay difference on the GS scale between WV and AL.

  4. permial Says:

    I must agree with Trescml, once local congress people have their hooks into re-election there’s no stopping them. Being rational is not what got them elected in the first place.

    A question for Cy, why would you put NASA in West Virginia? Our spacecraft (e.g. the shuttle, or space truck, whichever you prefer) lands 3 times out of 5 in SoCal, so why not put it there?

    And on the response from Trescml, I somewhat agree, but still would like to know why we don’t put facilities where we can actually launch and recover from. It would beat carrying the space truck across country on the back of a 747.

  5. Trescml Says:

    Permial,

    Well I am not a rocket scientist (nor do I play one on this blog) but I believe the further south a launch site is, the more lbs you can get into space for a given rocket. So beyond the political considerations there is some technical reason to be in Florida. I looked up on Wikipedia and around half of the shuttle flights landed in Florida but you are right that it is expensive to cart it across the country.

  6. J. Harden Says:

    .5% of his $3.4 TRILLION budget — which by the way, the .5% will probably, most likely, be added back in by Congress.

    I just wish he’d stop trying to play lip-serve to any notion of fiscal sanity. Some of us have gone to our happy-place with all of his spending. This kind of thing has the effect of reminding us of a reality which we have had to psychologically disregard in order to survive. This just opens the wound afresh and for no legitimate purpose other that a political ploy for stupid people. Why must he keep victimizing me????????

  7. J. Harden Says:

    Sorry, that is .05%

  8. J. Harden Says:

    No sorry that is .005%

  9. Kevin Says:

    We could go back in time, wipe out the Iraq war that Bush forced on us and that would have saved a trillion plus. Add in the incompetence that was Katrina (not all Bush’s fault but oh was he bad–anyone see how the Dutch do it and why we looked like a third world country?) Going back to Reagan we could take another big bite out of the mess we are in. Oh, but they were the fiscally responsible ones. Never mind.

  10. JD Says:

    That’s your answer Kevin for allowing the deficit to quadruple this year?? Your guys did it over 30 years… we want our shot and will see you an additional.

    Yeah that Katrina mess… how dare Mother Nature hit us with that tab… it was Bush’s fault that local officials over the years ignored the warning signs.

    Yep liberal all right. Poi

  11. MarkD Says:

    Republicans can always find a way to defend their inept administration and the colossal mismanagement that brought the worlds economy to it’s knees. They even find ways to support the lies that took us to a war that’s cost a trillion dollars and almost 5,000 American lives. failure to kill or capture OBL lays squarely at their feet. Until they come to terms with their failed ideology they may get some cross over votes. But in the near term they don’t have anyone smart enough to take on Obama.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: