Along with deficits rising, it appears the ratio of CEO pay to worker pay is also rising. As this United for a Fair Economy report highlights, CEO pay has shot up over the past few years, and now, while the average CEO makes $11.8 million per year, the average worker makes $27,460 per year. The ratio has spiked from 301-1 to 431-1. Perhaps even more unsettling news is that 46 large companies who made more than $30 billion in profits in 2003 paid absolutely no income taxes that year. Also, the report notes that the CEO's presiding over the most underfunded pensions had salaries that were, on average, 72 percent more than other CEO salaries. Congressional GOP leaders and the administration often mention the "strong economy" we are currently experiencing. It is important to remember that while the economy may look strong for some, it is not strong for many of the workers who are earning a disgracefully low minimum wage.

Fiscal year 2005 ends this Friday, Sept. 30, and House and Senate Republican leaders have not been able to pass all spending bills for FY 2006 on the floor. Thus, we can expect them to pass a stop-gap funding bill to cover federal government spending by the end of the week. According to an aide, GOP leaders in both chambers will push through a CR to fund government programs through Nov. 18. While some believe this extension will give appropriators sufficient time to wrap up their work on the outstanding FY 2006 appropriations bills, others think GOP leaders will not make their ambitious goal to pass all of the bills as separate measures this year. While the House has passed all eleven of its spending bills, the Senate has only passed eight of twelve, and only two of those have been given final approval and sent to Bush for his signature.

Last Friday, General Accountability Office Comptroller David Walker strongly urged a "strategic, long range, and integrated" examination of tax expenditures to test their relevance and priority during a time when the federal budget is experiencing increasing strains. His comments came during the unveiling of a new GAO report recommending that the OMB and the Treasury take steps to ensure greater transparency of, and accountability for, tax expenditures. Walker emphasized to reporters, as he has in the past, the importance of putting the nation on a more "prudent and sustainable course for the long term." He insisted that doling out tax preferences has an impact on the government's bottom line, and at a time when we are experiencing high deficits, it is important to reevaluate some of those expenditures.

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post, E.J. Dionne, Jr. notes that although Republicans claim to be fiscally conservative, "our federal purse strings are in the hands of fiscal radicals." Spending in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina does have lawmakers on both sides of the aisle worried about potentially massive deficits. Some have been claiming a desire to take a fiscally responsible approach to spending, however cutting budgets while ignoring the costs of tax cuts is, in the long-run, not fiscally responsible at all. As was posted yesterday in the blog, members of the House Republican Study Committee proposed drastic funding cuts in order to offset Katrina spending; cuts that would -- as Dionne said -- take "$80 billion from Medicare and $50 billion from Medicaid over five years and suggest reductions in school lunches, rent subsidies for the poor and foreign aid, among other things." He goes on to point out, however, that the amount of money the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts is costing our country this year alone amounts to $225 billion -- which could more than cover the expected costs of dealing with Katrina. It doesn't, however, look like the Republican leadership is interested in pursuing this route to offset the costs of Katrina. Yesterday Bush pledged to join in on efforts to identify cuts elsewhere in the federal budget that can offset the expenditures for disaster aid, saying "I'm going to work with Congress to prioritize what may need to be cut." Cutting programs is the opposite of what needs to be done. In fact, many are arguing that a perpetual underinvestment in the infrastructure of our country is what allowed this disaster to spiral so radically out of hand in the first place.