Mikulski Slams White House: ‘Since You’re Pugnacious, Guess What? I’m Going To Be Pretty Pugnacious, Too’
Mikulski Slams White House: ‘Since You’re Pugnacious, Guess What? I’m Going To Be Pretty Pugnacious, Too’
The White House has proposed a $108 billion emergency-spending bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Frustrated that U.S. taxpayers continue to pay for the wars while domestic needs go unmet, lawmakers have attempted to attach spending for domestic programs to the bill. But Bush has balked, promising to veto any such bills.
During a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing yesterday, White House budget director Jim Nussle ironically blasted lawmakers for “sky-is-the-limit mind-set” on the spending bill. One of the most combative moments came when Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) chastised Nussle for his “snarky, scolding, dismissive” responses to the senators and the Bush administration’s attitude toward funding the nation’s law enforcement officers:
Your testimony has been disappointing in both tone and substance. I personally take offense at the snarky, scolding, dismissive way that this testimony represents. And I think it’s inappropriate. […]
This is an ideological commentary, not the testimony of OMB. So since you’re pugnacious, guess what? I’m going to be pretty pugnacious, too, only my pugnaciousness is not going to be directed at the Congress. It’s going to be pugnacious about the people I represent. […]
Number one, let’s go to safety and security. We have funded the surge of Baghdad, but we have not funded the surge of violent crime in Baltimore, Biloxi, or other places. You have zeroed out the COPS program. You have zeroed out the Byrne grant.
Watch it:
Bush has requested $603 million to train Iraqi police. But at the same time, his FY 2009 budget includes a 61 percent cut for state and local law enforcement programs at the Justice Department.
Transcript:
MIKULSKI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you very much for calling this hearing. I think it’s the essential thing we need to do.
Mr. Nussle, I’ve got to tell you, I’m really disappointed in your testimony. It’s been some time that I have heard the kind of tone that has been expressed by a representative of the Bush administration. Your testimony has been disappointing in both tone and substance.
I personally take offense at the snarky, scolding, dismissive way that this testimony represents. And I think it’s inappropriate. […]
This is an ideological commentary, not the testimony of OMB. So since you’re pugnacious, guess what? I’m going to be pretty pugnacious, too, only my pugnaciousness is not going to be directed at the Congress. It’s going to be pugnacious about the people I represent.
So let’s get to it. Pugnacious? You bet. Let’s pick up on what Leahy and Harkin said about the Byrne grant. You want the regular order? I am the regular order. I chair CJS. And what this administration has done here has been outrageous.
Number one, let’s go to safety and security. We have funded the surge of Baghdad, but we have not funded the surge of violent crime in Baltimore, Biloxi, or other places. You have zeroed out the COPS program. You have zeroed out the Byrne grant.
When Shelby and Mikulski tried to do something last year in the regular budget, we were told, Eat $3 billion or face a veto threat. So we foraged and we skimped and we squeezed in to be able to make sure that our bill didn’t get a veto threat, and we came up with $170 million.
You can talk about all your smokestacks and whatever, but you bet there’s smoke. There’s smoke right here and now, and there is frustration from state and local police officers that say they need help. They need help.
And this administration has funded $5 billion over the last couple of years to fund the training of Iraqi police. You bet they need training. But I am telling you, I need the money, Senator Shelby and I need the money to make sure that our local law enforcement, the thin blue line, gets the money that they need to fight violent crime. So I’m going to ask in plain English: If, in fact, we (inaudible) the supplemental, restore the Byrne grants and only the Byrne grants to the needed level of $560 million, will you support it or will we face a veto threat?
NUSSLE: Well, Senator, I can only repeat what the president has said.
MIKULSKI: The president didn’t say anything about this. You think if I went to see the president, he would say, No ?
NUSSLE: Senator, I can only repeat what the president said. And his two priorities that he stated were that the bill stay within the $108.1 billion request and that it support the troops. That’s what he has said on the topic.
Beyond that, I don’t believe he has — I think the senator is correct — not spoken directly to those issues. But I also believe that the regular appropriations process is the time and the place to deal with those challenges. And…
MIKULSKI: But you eliminated it. You eliminated the COPS program, and you eliminated the Byrne grant program in your regular appropriations request.
So you’re saying, Don’t fund it in the supplemental. The president doesn’t request it in the regular order. And now you’re telling me you can’t accept it in the supplemental because the president didn’t talk about it. And when you sent us the CJS president’s request, it’s not in there for ‘09. […]
Mr. Chairman, with your cooperation, I hope that we do and fund it. If we’re talking about a safe and secure America, I want to make sure the streets of the United States of America are safe and secure. And I will work on a bipartisan basis to do it.
BYRD: Senator Murray?
MURRAY: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for having this hearing.
And, Mr. Nussle, I share the anger, frustration, I guess pugnaciousness of the senator from Maryland. It is extremely disturbing to me that we are getting an emergency supplemental request for Iraq and Afghanistan five-and-a-half years into this war that’s being paid for off the books.
Indeed, as the CRS reports, “past Administrations have requested, and Congress has provided, funding for ongoing military operations in regular appropriations bills as soon as even a limited and partial projection of costs could be made.”
Shouldn’t funding requests for foreign military operations the American people do not support be held to the same standard as funding requests for domestic priorities the American people desperately need? Just asking…"
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
41 Responses to “Mikulski Slams White House: ‘Since You’re Pugnacious, Guess What? I’m Going To Be Pretty Pugnacious, Too’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Bush: the country can go to pot, but my wars can’t. So Congress, go Cheney yourself.
April 17th, 2008 at 12:51 pmSen. Barbara Mikulski (D-CA) chastised Nussle for his “snarky, scolding, dismissive” responses
Correction, TP: Senator Mikulski represents the citizens of Maryland, not California.
April 17th, 2008 at 12:51 pmYou go Mikulski!!! Great job fighting for Americans.
April 17th, 2008 at 12:57 pmWow. A democrat actually seeing the light? I can’t believe it.
It utterly astonishes me why the dems don’t hit home on this. Its so f-ing simple. Why can’t one of the dems hold a press conference and just say: “the economy sucks and Bush wants to send YOUR tax dollars to Iraq, while you struggle here at home.”
April 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pmkick ass! i see a spine!
April 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pmBushco could care less about what is happening here, he is more worried about Wall sreet than Main street,our countries infrastructure is falling apart and he want`s more $$$$ for the war, our soldiers can`t even get decent treatment for the wounds they receive whether they are physical or mentally maimed.John McCain means four more years of this crap,I say NO.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pmAnd Nussle needed some Preparation H after that reaming.
Wonder if they ( Senators ) will now send a a nasty letter with lots of exclamation points, that will show them, yeah…..
April 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pmAnd Nussle needed some Preparation H after that reaming.
Wonder if they ( Senators ) will now send a nasty letter with lots of exclamation points, that will show them, yeah…..
April 17th, 2008 at 1:02 pmNo one will cover it because it derails the corporate talking points that they want you to hear.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:05 pm.
BushCo fighting hard for that war of terror…
Keeping us secure at home…
By ensuring local and State law enforcment is NOT funded and while making Iraq the top recruiting tool for the “common enemy” each day America remains in Iraq.
.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:08 pmWhy does Bush hate cops? Maybe we should open up some of those super duper secret records of his and find out.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:10 pmPugnacious is good.
Confrontation with these bastards is good.
I would love to tell Boy George to go fck himself, I wish those who have access to the smug little shit would say it.
But that’s part of the problem, only the KoolAid drinkers are allowed to get close to the King, the 28%ers with kneepads and long probing tongues.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:12 pmi’m so sick of the IDIOT and his failed criminal war! The whole country, its economy infrastructure going stale, but the hard-headed knucklehead idiot persists dumping billions a month into his never ending debacle! If this was France they would have chopped his head a long time ago. Who would have thought America would end up so hopeless under the idiot’s wrath?
April 17th, 2008 at 1:12 pm.
National Security begins at home and NOT by inciting violent extremism angered at you from abroad. How does the BushCo propose we remain safe from the blow back of their FAILED policy of aggressive war? Some people call it preemptive war or preventative war, but I have but one question: What war are you preventing by engaging in a war? It’s akin to burning down your house so as to prevent it from being burnt down. IT DOES NOT PASS MUSTER… And the White House solution… throw more fire on the situation. MY ASS!
.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:14 pmI agree with all the previous poster’s comments. It’s about freakin’ time somebody put these punks in their place and gave a dose of reality to them. Bet he’s gonna run back & tell the big Dick what happened & what is he gonna do about it. Finally somebody that this admin can’t blackmail into silence and keep in line. As good as it sounded, it still shows a glaring weakness in most of the other Democrat’s will to say & do the right thing.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:15 pmIt is telling that the General who was in charge of training Iraqi troops after Petraeus failed at that is now CentCom commander, LTG Martin Dempsey (acting). So to reward his failure at training Iraqi soldiers, they replaced Admiral Fallon with this flunky. Why does this administration reward failure? Is it because only flunky failures are willing to respond, how high? & what color? when W tells them to drop a Cheney.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:22 pmHey Dems! tell the chymp to stuff it. Don’t pass ANY appropriation until he decides to compromise and redirect our tax dollars back home. NO MORE MONEY FOR WAR!, er, uh, OCCUPATION!…
April 17th, 2008 at 1:24 pmSen. Barbara Mikulski, please be pugnacious all the time. I throughly enjoyed you beating up on Nussle with words. We need to clone you fast Barbara. I hope your speech not only puts a fire under Mr. Nussle, my sincere hope is that it inspires more Democrats to stand up and be pugnacious also.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:25 pmKeep up the great work for your constituents in Maryland and all the policemen that make our lives safe at home.
It is extremely disturbing to me that we are getting an emergency supplemental request for Iraq and Afghanistan five-and-a-half years into this war that’s being paid for off the books.
Yep, it’s this sort of thing that makes me “bitter”.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:27 pmOMB and the Bush admin argue again and again that funding for increasingly urgent domestic priorities, including healthcare, combating crime, and even funding for educating returning Iraq War veterans ought to be handled via the regular appropriations process, while they hypocritically fund their failing venture in Iraq in an unprecedented fashion: with supplemental after supplemental.
Indeed, as the CRS reports, “past Administrations have requested, and Congress has provided, funding for ongoing military operations in regular appropriations bills as soon as even a limited and partial projection of costs could be made.”
Shouldn’t funding requests for foreign military operations the American people do not support be held to the same standard as funding requests for domestic priorities the American people desperately need? Just asking…
April 17th, 2008 at 1:29 pmI’m afraid I’m still angry at Mikulski for voting against the Dodd Amendment to remove telecom immunity. I understand that telecoms are big contributors to her campaign. She’s probably retiring in 2010 anyway so look for her to take up a lucrative position as a telecom lobbyist/consultant.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:29 pm$108B in emergency funding, in addition to what’s already been spent:
http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/ policy/ securityspending/ articles/ supplemental_war_funding/
Like I said before: Fine, insert the domestic funding.
There has been 5 years of “emergency” war funding. America is hemorrhaging and in need of urgent care.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:30 pmHow about only passing a bill that FUNDS the war from taxes instead of BORROWING for the war??
April 17th, 2008 at 1:32 pmWell, after all, Bush’s cronies make money on the war, not on funding our own needs here at home.
This bunch of criminals can’t leave office fast enough for me.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:34 pmThis little outburst reminds me of a couple others in the last eight years. Eight years from now we will see if it had any effect. Don’t get your hopes up. It maybe another fifty years before you see the last of the effects of GWB. When they run out the clock their hands don’t stop right away.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:38 pmI don’t know if anyone else would agree with me or not, but I see the elimination of these programs as a further step to privitation. All paid for at the tax payers expense.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:41 pmSee how they vote, not how they talk.
April 17th, 2008 at 1:52 pmAfter the meeting, Nussie went down to the basement to print the money for the Iraq War.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:06 pmIt’s time we stop funding the fiasco in Iraq. That is the ONLY way this occupation and waste of MY tax dollars is going to stop. I say to Congress, quit playing footsies with the Bush Administration and do the right thing. STOP FUNDING THIS FIASO IN IRAQ. Bring our soldiers home.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:10 pmThe Democratic congress has the perfect vehicle for ending the funding for the Iraq occupation. All they have to do is to refuse to do any more “off the books” emergency spending authorizations for Iraq. They need to tell Bush that any further spending on Iraq will come out of the US budget and not be funded on borrowed money from China. If you don’t think that will get the attention of the 28% who still think Iraq was a good idea, I don’t know what will.
It is absolutely ridiculous that after 5 years of funding this fiasco, the funding bills are still being called “emergency funding” and we are borrowing every penny from China. Any more borrowing and China will own this country lock-stock and barrel.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:14 pm#30 Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
——————————————————————————–
The Democratic congress has the perfect vehicle for ending the funding for the Iraq occupation. All they have to do is to refuse to do any more “off the books” emergency spending authorizations for Iraq. They need to tell Bush that any further spending on Iraq will come out of the US budget and not be funded on borrowed money from China. If you don’t think that will get the attention of the 28% who still think Iraq was a good idea, I don’t know what will.
It is absolutely ridiculous that after 5 years of funding this fiasco, the funding bills are still being called “emergency funding” and we are borrowing every penny from China. Any more borrowing and China will own this country lock-stock and barrel.
You ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT… At the rate we are going Chinese will become our first language.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:26 pmApril 17th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
“GOD BLESS CHINA!”
April 17th, 2008 at 2:33 pmOn the one hand I’m surprised the administration doesn’t pump so much money into law enforcement it gets stifling, but rather reduce it.
Then again, maybe they just want martial law pretty soon or hire contractors here.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:46 pmNote to Mikulski from a registered Maryland Democrat voter: seven plus years into the administration is a tad late to get tough!
April 17th, 2008 at 2:47 pmTwo thumbs-up, and three snaps of the finger, you go girl.
April 17th, 2008 at 3:24 pmThe cynic in me wonders if Sen. Mikulski is up for re-election this year :(
April 17th, 2008 at 3:39 pmMikulski is a lapdog for the Bush Adminstration I voted for her and She voted for Telecom Immunity. she can forget about my vote.
April 17th, 2008 at 3:50 pmSomebody should really call these idiots out on their support of the troops. It takes more than words and a G-dam flag lapel pin. How about fully funding the 21st century GI bill,and taking care of all of them when they get home.
April 17th, 2008 at 3:51 pmSen. Mikulski is my rep and she did good here.
This administration considers “crime fighting” a local issue. Not one that they should have to dirty their hands with.
April 17th, 2008 at 4:10 pmThey will tell you they are responsible for the “security and safety” of America from outside forces. They fail to see that the crime problem is rotting the foundation from the inside out.
And they are unwilling to do anything about it.
Ditto.
April 18th, 2008 at 3:34 am