Today, the president formally requested funds that Defense Secretary Robert Gates was sent to the Hill in September to retrieve. This request brings total FY 2008 supplemental war funding to $196.4 billion. It is the latest in a series. FY 2008 War Supplemental Funding Requests (billions of dollars) Occasion Funds for Dept. of Defense Funds for State Dept. and Other Agencies Total Request February, With President's FY 2008 Budget Reqeust 141.7 3.5 145.2 July, Dep. Defense Sec. England's Congressional Testimony 5.3 - 5.3 September, Sec. Gates's Congressional Testimony 42.3 3.6 45.9

The Senate is debating the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill today (and probably tomorrow), and Sen. Wayne Allard has introduced a disturbing amendment that would automatically cut the budget of any program that was given an "ineffective" PART rating by the Office of Management and Budget. Under Allard's amendment, any program that is listed as "ineffective" under the PART would be automatically cut by 10 percent, with the amount cut used to pay down the national debt. To see which programs would be cut, see this list of "ineffective" programs on the ExpectMore.gov website: programs rated ineffective. The list includes Even Start, the Perkins loan program, vocational education grants, Upward Bound, the Workforce Investment Act programs for Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers and Youth, the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant, and the Healthy Community Access program, among others. But there is a larger issue at play here than where you come down on these programs or the PART itself (and you should come down against it). Congress is granted the authority to appropriate public funds under the Constitution, not the executive branch. Enacting this amendment would transfer that authority to the executive branch, and more specifically to a number of unelected public employees whose sole job is to carry out the policy preferences of the president. Why would any Senator want to vote to give him or herself less power? What's more, imagine the degree or manipulation of future PART scores for programs covered under this bill if this administration (or any future one) knew a rating of "ineffective" would bring an automatic 10 percent cut. Something tells me we would start to see a whole lot more "ineffective" ratings for programs in the Departments of Education, Labor, and Health and Human Services. A vote on the amendment is likely later today or tomorrow morning. Please take 5 minutes to call your Senators offices to tell them to vote no on the Allard amendment to the Labor-HHS-Education bill.

White House Spokesperson, Dana Perino: "We won this round on SCHIP." Congratulations on winning. What exactly did you win? Well, here's President Bush, on vetoing SCHIP: And that's why when I tell you I'm going to sprint to the finish, and finish this job strong, that's one way to ensure that I am relevant. That's one way to ensure that I'm in the process. And I intend to use the veto.

After yesterday's post on the budget process, I got to thinking: what's the point of the Congressional Budget Resolution (see this Powerpoint for budget process basics)? Budget process experts will tell you that it brings order and coordination to the annual budget. But it also puts pressure to keep discretionary spending low. I'm talking about the cap on discretionary spending. Once it's set, it's rarely exceeded. In fact, its purpose is to make sure that spending does not go above a certain level. That is anti-spending.