Click here to view the government document released late friday night which gives specifics as to which programs were cut or eliminated in the President's FY 06 budget. Bush proposed that 150 programs be cut or eliminated, but specifics as to which exact programs would be hurt were not released until days after the budget proposal came out.

As Senate Budget Committee chairman Judd Gregg (R-NH) noted publicly last week, the release of the President's austere budget not only has Democrats up in arms, but also is creating "some significant angst among my colleagues" on the other side of the aisle. Senator Voinovich (R-OH) in particular has come out against the fiscal irresponsibility of Bush's economic agenda, announcing last week that he will oppose efforts to make the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent. Voinovich said he will vote against the President's budget if necessary, and cited having possible support among other Republican colleagues of his in the so-called "Centrist Coalition," including Senators Collins (R-ME), Snowe (R-ME), and Bennett R-UT). See this Toledo Blade article for additional information. In related news, an article in today's Washington Post reports other lawmakers, including Senator McCain (R-AZ), have been raising concerns regarding the long term costs of some of Bush's fiscal policies. The article hints that people eyeing the White House in 2008 have reason to be worried since budget costs are expected to drastically increase in the coming years.

Read Paul Krugman's op-ed in today's NY Times, titled "Bush's Class War Budget" for a good assessment of who the winners and losers are under Bush's current budget proposal. Krugman discusses the fact that until the budget was released earlier this week, this notion of fiscal restraint has been "an abstract concept." Yet now we see this restraint tied to specific actions, and those actions will be incredibly harmful both now and in years to come, if this budget is indeed adopted by Congress.