Obama's 2011 Budget Highlights

(AP)  President Barack Obama's multi-trillion-dollar budget would boost spending for several government agencies while slashing the account for others. Here is an agency-by-agency glance:

Agency: Agriculture

Spending: $148.6 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 9.7 percent increase

Mandatory Spending: $122.8 billion

Highlights: Obama's proposed budget includes hundreds of millions of dollars in increased spending to help feed the poor while also limiting government handouts to wealthy farmers.

The budget would provide $8.1 billion for nutrition programs, a $400 million increase from the president's 2010 budget. It would allocate $10 billion over 10 years to improve access to USDA food programs, establishing higher nutrition standards at schools and aiming to reduce childhood hunger.

The budget also would increase government spending on food stamps, a jump of $11 million to a proposed $36 million. That includes an extension for an additional year of benefits under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which temporarily eliminated food stamp time limits for certain low-income adults.

Obama wants to limit the amount of money that wealthy farmers can receive from the government. Direct payments to farmers would be reduced from $40,000 per person per year to $30,000. Direct payments are payments to farmers based on historical production.

The budget also proposes limiting direct payments to farmers who make $500,000 or less in farm income; the limit is currently $750,000 or less.

Also in Obama's agriculture proposal:

$429 million for research grants through the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.

$418 million in loans and grants for expanding rural broadband access.

$1.2 billion for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program to help farmers comply with regulatory requirements and protect natural resources, a 67 percent increase in funding over 2010.

Agency: Commerce

Spending: $9.1 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 34.4 percent decrease

Mandatory Spending: $180 million

Highlights: The department's discretionary budget would decline from $13.8 billion in 2010 to $8.9 billion in the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. Much of the proposed decrease comes from the U.S. Census Bureau, which received a huge spending increase last year to hire about a half million people and conduct the 2010 census.

The proposed Commerce budget would provide $1.3 billion to process, tabulate and release 2010 census data. Funds for the census are closely watched by Congress because the count determines government pay-outs to states and cities and the number of congressional seats in each state. Democrats typically seek more funds to enable accurate counts for poor and minority communities who have been undercounted in the past.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which oversees the government's weather forecasting and conducts climate and ocean research, would get more money in the plan. The proposal would provide NOAA with more than $2 billion - the equivalent of the worldwide box office take of the blockbuster film "Avatar" - for weather satellites, measurements of sea level and other climate data.

The proposed budget would eliminate a grant program created in 2004 for manufacturers of worsted wool fabric. The department said wool manufacturers had enough time to adjust to changes in the trade law. It would also ax funding for a program that supports public television stations' conversion to digital broadcasting. The department said the required conversion efforts have been completed and money for remaining digital conversion would be available from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Agency: Defense

Spending: $768.2 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 2.2 percent increase

Mandatory Spending: $59.9 billion

Highlights: Obama's budget would boost defense spending slightly, with more money for helicopters, unmanned planes, commandos and other highly specialized assets that officials say are needed to fight nimble enemy forces in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

The budget also would support for the first time Obama's envisioned European missile shield aimed at deterring Iran. Last fall, Obama scrapped a Bush-era project in Eastern Europe in favor of smaller radar systems with a network of sensors and missiles deployed at sea or on land.

Unlike last year's budget, when Obama called for an end to F-22 production, Obama's 2011 plan spares the military's major defense systems. The budget supports the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a new family of ground vehicles, as well as new ships.

One exception is the C-17 cargo plane, which the administration says the military should stop buying. The proposed cut would save $2.5 billion. The Pentagon has tried to cease production of the aircraft before, but lawmakers have restored the money because they fear ending the program would cost jobs in their home states.

Included in the $768 billion request is $159 billion for operations overseas.

In addition to the 2011 defense budget, Obama is asking for another $33 billion in war spending to sustain operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through September. The administration says the extra money was needed because of the 30,000 more troops being sent to Afghanistan.

Obama Budget Projects $1.56T Deficit
Proposed Tax Hikes in Obama's Budget
Deficit Declines Next Year, But Debt Keeps Soaring
Billions More for Schools, but with a Catch?

Agency: Education

Spending: $82.3 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 32.8 percent increase

Mandatory Spending: $32.6 billion

Highlights: Obama is asking Congress for a major increase in education spending as he seeks to overhaul the nation's system and revise the Bush-era No Child Left Behind law.

The administration wants to help an additional 1 million college students by increasing the Pell Grant tuition program by $17 billion, to just under $35 billion. Pell Grants are the main form of college aid to the poor. The maximum grant would increase by $160 to $5,710.

Obama is seeking an increase in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, a $3 billion jump to $28 billion. There could be $1 billion more if Congress agrees to some major changes in the law.

The administration wants $1.35 billion more to expand the president's Race to the Top challenge, a federal grant program in which 40 states are competing for $4 billion in education money included in last year's stimulus bill.

In revising the No Child Left Behind law, Obama wants changes in how schools are judged to be successes or failures. The administration contends that if federal education spending is more competitive, states and school districts would do a better job. That's a change from the government's traditional formula-driven approach in which states and districts can look forward to getting a certain amount of money each school year, regardless of how good a job they do educating students.

Obama favors using student test scores to judge teacher performance and determine support for charter schools, which get public money but operate independently of local school boards. National teachers' unions disagree with that approach, saying student achievement is more than standardized test scores and that relying heavily on charter schools is a mistake.

Congress passed the No Child Left Behind law with bipartisan support in 2001 but deadlocked over a rewrite in 2007.

Agency: Energy

Spending: $26.8 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 9.2 percent increase

Mandatory Spending: None.

Highlights: The budget follows through on Obama's call in his State of the Union address to build "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country," by tripling the amount for loan guarantees for nuclear power to $54.5 billion. The spending proposal also aims to give a boost to energy efficiency and renewable energy projects with an additional $500 million in credit subsidy in support of $3 billion to $5 billion in loan guarantees.

As a candidate, Obama promised to close the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste facility in Nevada, and the budget calls for eliminating funding for the site.

The budget also calls for a 4.6 percent increase in basic research.

Funding would be increased for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs such as solar energy.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency

Spending: $9.9 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 3.2 percent decrease

Mandatory Spending: None.

Highlights: Obama's budget would finance efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the gases blamed for global warming - a first - as the administration awaits congressional action on legislation.

The budget seeks $43 million in new funds for the EPA and states to control emissions of heat-trapping pollution from automobiles and refineries, power plants and factories. The administration also is looking for more money to roll out a new rule that would require polluters to annually report the amount of greenhouse gases they release.

Unlike last year, the budget does not bank on raising money for a promised tax cut and clean energy technologies by auctioning off permits to companies that emit global warming gases. Congress has balked at that strategy. A House-passed bill gives the bulk of the permits away for free, as would a proposal being worked on in the Senate. Instead, there is a placeholder for a to-be-determined climate policy that would reduce emissions by more than 80 percent by 2050. The budget says the policy will be deficit neutral because the money made from selling permits will be returned to families, communities and businesses to help offset higher energy costs.

With a slight decrease in its request for hazardous-waste sites, the administration will likely continue to lag behind previous administrations in the pace of its cleanups.

The budget would continue to supply billions of dollars worth of grants to states and local governments to improve sewage treatment plants and drinking water systems, although the total is slightly less than last year. It adds another $1.3 billion - a 14 percent increase - to help cash-strapped states and tribes implement air and water programs.

Agency: Health and Human Services

Spending: $915.5 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 3.9 percent increase

Mandatory Spending: $832 billion

Highlights: Obama's health care budget takes modest steps to stretch the safety net for low-income families trapped in the economic downturn and improve the quality of medical care for seniors.

But his biggest project - health care overhaul to expand coverage and grapple with costs - is on hold in Congress with Democrats uncertain how to push the sweeping legislation over the finish line.

The budget includes a $25.5 billion cash infusion to help states cover the costs of their Medicaid programs until July of next year. Medicaid rolls grew as state revenues plummeted during the recession. Under the budget, every state would get an additional 6.2 percent of its Medicaid costs paid by Washington. That would extend federal assistance provided under the stimulus bill.

Obama is also calling for a big increase - $290 million - for community health centers that are front-line providers of medical care for low-income Americans, including many uninsured.

The budget takes a small - but potentially significant - step to improve Medicare quality by launching a series of experiments on how to better coordinate care for seniors with multiple chronic illness. And it adds funds for research into what kinds of medical treatments work best.

Also in Obama's health budget:

A crackdown on fraud, waste and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid, which the administration estimates could save more than $1 billion a year over the next decade.

A $1.4 billion investment to improve food safety, following outbreaks of illness in recent years.

A $1 billion increase for the National Institutes of Health for medical research, including the development of new drugs for cancer and other life-threatening illnesses.

Obama: Taxes Can't be "Monopoly Money"
With Budget in Hand, Congress Starts Real Work
Analysis: Obama Likely To Miss Jobs, Deficit Goals

Agency: Homeland Security

Spending: $44 billion

Percentage change from 2010: 1 percent increase

Mandatory Spending: $193 million

Highlights: In the wake of the attempted Christmas Day terrorist attack, Obama is seeking to strengthen aviation security programs.

The budget proposes funds to pay for 1,000 technologically advanced machines at airports. There is also money to hire more Federal Air Marshals so that they will be on more international flights. Currently there are more than 4,000 air marshals, with the exact figure classified.

While Obama is asking for the same amount in overall funds for screening operations - such as those at airports - he is asking for more money for explosive detection devices.

The budget calls for 25 percent less money for the border fence and technology - a controversial George W. Bush administration initiative that has run into problems.

The president's is asking for more money for counterterrorism and preparedness grants.

On the heels of the administration's decision to reconsider holding the high profile Sept. 11 trial in New York City, the president is asking for $200 million in grants available to those cities that do end up holding these trials. New York lawmakers said it would cost them $200 million a year if the trial is held in a Manhattan courthouse.

Despite promises to make cyber security a priority in his administration, Obama is asking for a decrease in funds for the department's cyber security division. He is also asking for less money to fund a program that detects biological threats.

Obama also is calling for cutting 1,100 active duty personnel in the Coast Guard and 181 Border Patrol agents. Recent administrations have hired more agents and Obama said the current number of about 20,000 agents is sufficient. Funds for immigration enforcement remains basically the same as last year.

Agency: Housing and Urban Development

Spending: $48.9 billion

Percentage change from 2010: .9 percent decrease

Mandatory Spending: $7.3 billion

Highlights: The agency got a big boost in funding during the president's first year but would experience a small cut in the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.

Cuts would occur in a fund used to renovate public housing inventory, from $2.3 billion to $2 billion, and in the block grants used for constructing Native American housing, from $690 million to $578 million. Two programs that finance the development of supportive housing for the elderly and disabled will be suspended, though projects already in the pipeline would continue.

The agency will also begin consolidating 13 rental assistance programs to cut down on duplicative work assignments and improve customer service.

Spending on homelessness assistance would increase by nearly $200 million, or about 10 percent. Also, a recent increase in borrower fees and stricter lending requirements will generate $6 billion in profit for the Federal Housing Administration, a stark contrast to the publicly anticipated shortfall. The agency is a major source of funds for first time home buyers and there have been concerns that it would need a cash infusion.

[curse914]

by -One_American- February 2, 2010 11:12 AM EST
Backdoor taxes to hit middle class



Obama is a liar, a thief, and a thug.

America needs to get rid of him. Now.

------------------------------
------------------------------

Who do you recommend replace him and what monetary polices are going to fix this problem?

Government spending is the last bubble before the dollar collapses. Neither the GOP or the Democrats are going to face the hard facts that Free Trade and Deregulation of the Financial and Commodities Markets has crushed our economy irreparably.

[curse914]

by usaguy2010 February 2, 2010 7:19 AM EST
Why are any of us surprised. Spending what we don;t have is and has always been the democrats solution to everything. Obama is clueless. The next 3 years can't go by fast enough. I hope you libs remember this crap come Novemeber 2012.

-----------------------------
-----------------------------

Your outrage is bogus unless you are proposing voting outside of the Republican and Democrat Parties. The GOP since Reagan has sent spending through the stratosphere.

The danger with the debt created under every administration since Reagan is now we face a total collapse of the dollar.

There are rumblings from "respected" economists that the dollar will collapse this year. Peter Schiff is recommending the Investor Class invest outside of the United States (what a patriot). He is also planing on running as a Republican in 2012. What he is running for is the Corporatist Party.

[-One_American-]

Backdoor taxes to hit middle class

By Terri Cullen Terri Cullen ? Mon Feb 1, 4:09 pm ET

NEW YORK (Reuters.com) --The Obama administration's plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.

In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year -- effectively a tax hike by stealth.

While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration's Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.

If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.

*****

Obama is a liar, a thief, and a thug.

America needs to get rid of him. Now.

[rktsci3127]

Obama's idea for the country seem much like his idea for NASA...have no vision, set no goals, flounder.

[msimamaji]

This concern for passing the debt to our children and grandchildren is a lot of hypocritical garbage.

First of all, the next generation is crippled by student loans. Because we cut taxes, state colleges and universites raise tuition. We cut Pell grants and financial aid,forcing many students to drop out of school or to spend the rest of their live in debt. Our Iraqi/Afghan war vetrans will discover that the scholarship money they were promised doesn't pay the bills.

Secondly, our children will face a devastated environment. Everything from coal fired power plants, to nuclear power is turning our country into a toxic waste dump. A whole area of the Pacific ocean, as large as a continent is filled with plastic waste products. Our children will become sicker and poorer because of this.

Thirdly, we are destroying and using up all our natural resources. Our children will face massive price increases on everything from oil to products containing metal. We are failing to invest in either renewable energy or do we recycle what we use.

Finally, just because we turn our back on health care reform doesn't mean the problem goes away. Insurance rates will continue to sky rocket, simply because the health insurance industry needs to pay of lobbyists and polticians. In addition 2010 is an election year, so health insurance companies need to make generous campaign contributions. As a result of the greed of private insurance companies, our children and grandchildren may find medical care a luxury only the super=rich can afford.

If we want to balance the budget and reduce the debt, let's roll back all the taxes the wealthy got since the days of Reagan. all the wealthy do is bribe politicians and steal from everybody else. We need to hand down to our children the chance to begin careers debt free. We need to give them a clean earth with renewable energy. This is far more important than tax cuts for the few.

[inketolstoy]

How will saddling the next generations with more debt (as your post so adequately argues is already too great) help? We have spent the current generation's social security, already require young people to mortgage their future for a college education, poluted the earth (though some improvements have been made over the last decade) and are speeding up consumption of fossil fuels while putting little effort into alternative energy or recylcing. But you think it is hypocritical to argue against our government borrowing against their future because......

[msimamaji]

This concern for passing the debt to our children and grandchildren is a lot of hypocritical garbage.

First of all, the next generation is crippled by student loans. Because we cut taxes, state colleges and universites raise tuition. We cut Pell grants and financial aid,forcing many students to drop out of school or to spend the rest of their live in debt. Our Iraqi/Afghan war vetrans will discover that the scholarship money they were promised doesn't pay the bills.

Secondly, our children will face a devastated environment. Everything from coal fired power plants, to nuclear power is turning our country into a toxic waste dump. A whole area of the Pacific ocean, as large as a continent is filled with plastic waste products. Our children will become sicker and poorer because of this.

Thirdly, we are destroying and using up all our natural resources. Our children will face massive price increases on everything from oil to products containing metal. We are failing to invest in either renewable energy or do we recycle what we use.

Finally, just because we turn our back on health care reform doesn't mean the problem goes away. Insurance rates will continue to sky rocket, simply because the health insurance industry needs to pay of lobbyists and polticians. In addition 2010 is an election year, so health insurance companies need to make generous campaign contributions. As a result of the greed of private insurance companies, our children and grandchildren may find medical care a luxury only the super=rich can afford.

If we want to balance the budget and reduce the debt, let's roll back all the taxes the wealthy got since the days of Reagan. all the wealthy do is bribe politicians and steal from everybody else. We need to hand down to our children the chance to begin careers debt free. We need to give them a clean earth with renewable energy. This is far more important than tax cuts for the few.

[hull7777]

The problem with politics is that no matter which party is in power, the special interests get all the advantages (not the everyday middle American). Take the health care proposal: there were rwo thousand pages that no one really read or understood; however, the House had to protect the Unions (they got exemptions)and both sides of congress protected the trial lawyers (no tort reform). How can there be meaningful legislation to help everyone when those who support the candidates with BIG MONEY get all the breaks?



Actually, it has been the Union strangle hold on business and business' lack of conviction in the good times that have made US products too expensive in the global economy. Thus, eliminating US manufacturing and jobs. Yet, Congress lets the Unions off the hook because they spend a great deal of money supporting Democratic candidates.

The Republicans are no better;however, they get their money from different Big Business.

MY POINT IS, HOW CAN ANYTHING GET LEGISLATED THAT WILL HELP GET ANYTHING ACCOMPLISHED FOR US "EVERYDAY PEOPLE".

[payasyougo]

Half of the voting public spent the last three election cycles voting out Republicans that approved every bit of spending that crossed their desks. The Republicans remaining now understand that they are to stop the spending or they lose their jobs.

When will the conservative Democratic votors step up and put a stop to their party's spending?

[starving1968-2]

Are you kidding?

How much do you think we're currently paying for all of the conservatives failed policies and frivolous wasteful spending?

They look at Massachusetts and view that as a sign that voters want republicans back in charge, to continue their wasteful spending and massive pork barrel projects.

[usaguy2010]

Why are any of us surprised. Spending what we don;t have is and has always been the democrats solution to everything. Obama is clueless. The next 3 years can't go by fast enough. I hope you libs remember this crap come Novemeber 2012.

[owlgal]

Obama controlling spending. What a joke. His wife has the largest "entourage" of assistants in the history of first ladies, all making considerable salaries. If he can't control the excess spending in his own house, how can he tell others to cut back.
And he sure doesn't have any control over Pelosi who spends taxpayer's money as if she has a right to it. Have you seen the bar bill for her plane? Reign in those around him and he will be off to a great start cutting expenses. He promised to cut "pork" and that fell by the wayside early on along with many of his other promises.