CFR which was going to be made unconstitutional by th SS Court.
NEA Funding, made the swimmer partially happy.
Wanting to legalize the illegals.
Hasn't shut the borders.
Signing the biggest welfare entitlement, since the great society.
Trying to cut the combat pay of soldiers.
Not coming out in favor of defense of marriage.
Yeah he signed the ban on partial birth abortions and gave us some of our money back.
Trying to think of something he really stands for, I got it T-ball at the white house.
Most of what you say is true.
But from the information I've been able to find, Bush was not behind cutting troop pay.
Good grief...you actually believed the leftist drivel? Yes, there was apparently a statement from the Pentagon saying they were going to cut the combat pay, but it was retracted the very next day (reading between the lines: Bush slapped someone upside the head for making the statement). Bush actually INCREASED the imminent danger pay in April for the first time in more than a decade, from $150 a month to $225. The "family separation allowances" was also increased from $100 a month to $250. He also expanded the Combat zone income tax exclusion. Even when they were discussing a supposed "cut", it was not really a cut, just a return to the old figure previously paid, as the increase was a temporary measure provided until the supplementary bill could be passed, which it was.
Here is what was included in a recent supplemental bill, note that the bold section states that they will be covered through Oct 2004:
¶ Combat zone income tax exclusion: Not paying the IRS income tax can save thousands of dollars. Those who benefit the most are in the government’s highest tax category: unmarried members without dependents or mortgages.
¶ Family Separation Allowance: For servicemembers with families, this helps pay the added housing expenses resulting from enforced separation. In April, Congress enacted a temporary increase, to $250 per month from $100 per month.
¶ Imminent Danger Pay: All servicemembers deployed to Iraq qualify for $225 per month in danger pay, which was boosted from $150 per month by Congress in April. Servicemembers get a month’s worth of this pay even if they were assigned to a designated area for just a single day.
¶ Hardship Duty Pay: All military personnel in Iraq get $100 per month.
¶ Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay: This generally is paid at a rate of $150 per month to officers and enlisted members whose orders require them to participate in “frequent and regular” duties considered unusually arduous or hazardous. The pay is prorated, meaning someone who works less than a month would get $3.33 per day. The pay comes in several categories, such as Crew Member Flight Pay, Non-crew Member Flight Pay, Parachute Duty Pay (“jump pay”), Demolition Duty Pay, Toxic Fuels (or Propellants) Duty Pay, Dangerous Viruses (or Bacteria) Lab Duty Pay, and Chemical Munitions Pay.
The boosts approved in April for Family Separation Allowance and Imminent Danger Pay, which were retroactive to October 2002, expire Oct. 30. But both pays are funded through the end of fiscal 2004 — October 2004 — in the Iraq supplemental bill now making its way through Congress. [Note: the bill was passed]
While lawmakers are arguing about portions of the supplemental bill related to civilian Iraqi development, no one has contested the military request, which accounts for the lion’s share. Meanwhile, if for some reason the supplemental bill does not pass, congressional authorizers may choose to include the pays in their 2004 defense budget as well, a pay and benefits official said Friday.
They are also extending TriCare to Reservists and the National Guard now:
Starting March 10, 2003, Guard and Reserve family members, if their sponsor is on active duty (federal) orders for more than 30 days, will be eligible to enroll in Tricare Prime and enjoy the access standards and cost shares associated with the Prime benefit.
And they got a pay raise for 2003, also concurrent receipt, improvements to TriCare:
Under the two bills, servicemembers will receive at least a 4.1 percent pay raise beginning Jan. 1. Many mid-level NCOs and officers will receive a pay jump of between 5.5 percent to 6.5 percent. The bills call for an increase in the basic allowance for housing to cut out-of-pocket expenses to 7.5 percent. The bill puts elimination of this financial inequity to servicemembers on course for fiscal 2005.
The act also deals with the hot button issue of concurrent receipt. Currently, military retirees who receive Department of Veterans Affairs disability payments have their retired pay reduced dollar-for-dollar by the VA payment.
The act authorizes an enhanced special compensation for military retirees who "incurred a qualifying combat-related disability." The retiree must have received the Purple Heart for the injury or have a service-connected disability of 60 percent or higher incurred as a direct result of combat or training for combat.
The act continues special pays and bonuses for active duty and reserve personnel and expands special pays given to high-demand military specialties. It also increases the bonus awarded to prior-service personnel.
The act makes medical improvements a high priority. The legislation calls on the Defense Department and the Department of Veterans Affairs to share assets, especially in regards to pharmacy benefits.
Congress continues to improve the TriCare program. The legislation expands TriCare Prime Remote to cover dependents who remain in remote locations when they cannot accompany sponsors. Congress also expressed concern over the stability of the TriCare provider networks. Many providers complain that claim processing takes too long. Under the legislation, the requirements for TriCare and Medicare are the same.
On death benefits, Bush has a bill on his desk (H.R. 3365 Fallen Patriots Tax Relief Act, passed 11/06/03) that DOUBLES the benefit and exempts it from tax, as well as many other tax benefits:
H.R. 3365 Fallen Patriots Tax Relief Act
I don't want to hear ANYONE say that Bush does not take care of our troops!
But upon closer look it is only symbolic and won't stop a single abortion.
...T-ball at the white house.
It will be interesting to see if he uses that as the crux of his 2004 campaign! ;-)
Don't read the news much do you?Just a few articles amongst hundreds I found in a search:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., lambasted President Bush for supporting a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and her comments boosted a grassroots campaign pressing her to run for president in 2004.
Clinton blasts Bush's gay marriage attack
"I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, and I think we ought to codify that one way or another," Bush told reporters at a White House news conference. "And we've got lawyers looking at the best way to do that."
Bush vows no 'compromise' on gay 'marriage'
"I don't know if it's necessary yet," Bush said of the proposed change, which is gaining steam in GOP circles after a landmark Supreme Court ruling last week. "Let's let the lawyers look at the full ramifications of the recent Supreme Court hearing. What I do support is a notion that marriage is between a man and a woman."
Among supporters of such an amendment is Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, who on Sunday said he "absolutely" supports it.< snip > A draft of the amendment, which has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, states that "marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."
US President George W. Bush has condemned the decision by Massachusetts' highest court that would allow same-sex marriages. "Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman," Bush said in a statement released in London, where he was on a state visit. "Today's decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court violates this important principle. I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."
A day after Bush revealed his staff was looking at ways to "codify" his belief that marriage should be limited to unions between a man and a woman, his spokesman noted a constitutional amendment is being "publicly debated" and acknowledged it is something the White House is considering "in this context." "There are some court cases that are happening, that are still pending," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. "There is speculation there may be some decisions soon in places like Massachusetts and New Jersey, so it's a question of what may be needed legally to protect and defend the sanctity of marriage." McClellan said the president "strongly supports" the Defense of Marriage Act, and suggested there is concern state rulings concerning gay marriage may necessitate updating or amending that law.
The Rockwell's of the world need to be reading the newspaper instead of reading the tarot cards and playing scare-monger with their wishful thinking.
During this week that President Bush has proclaimed “Marriage Protection Week,” (October 12-19, 2003), please call your federal lawmakers and ask them to take a stand in defense of marriage. We must work to ensure that members of the U.S. Senate and House make it one of their highest priorities to approve legislation and/or an amendment to protect the institution of marriage from those who seek to redefine it.
Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family is among the national leaders who believe the fight to defend marriage is critically important to the future of our society and to the well-being of generations yet to come – a turning point in our nation’s history.
Applauding the public stand in defense of marriage taken by President Bush and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Dobson calls on concerned citizens across the nation to “encourage those leaders who are willing to form a strong, united front on this issue.” He adds, “We need to convey to them in the strongest possible terms how important this issue is to us. We cannot accept compromise or uncertainty in the face of the current onslaught of gay activism.”
In the days just ahead, members of the U.S. Senate and House and expected to consider an amendment that would add a clear definition of marriage – as the “union of one man and one woman” – to the U.S. Constitution. That constitutional amendment is the only certain means of protecting the constitutional status of marriage from activist courts that could seek to destroy its meaning.
Senate version:
S.RES.275
Title: A resolution to affirm the Defense of Marriage Act.
Sponsor: Sen Nickles, Don [OK] (introduced 11/25/2003)
Cosponsors: 6
Latest Major Action: 11/25/2003 Referred to Senate committee.
Status: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
A resolution to affirm the Defense of Marriage Act
House version:
Title: To amend title 28, United States Code, to limit Federal court jurisdiction over questions under the Defense of Marriage Act.
Sponsor: Rep Hostettler, John N. [IN-8] (introduced 10/16/2003)
Cosponsors: 20
Latest Major Action: 10/16/2003 Referred to House committee.
Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Soooo...it is getting done, just not on your childish "I demand it yesterday" timetable. Quityerbitchin' already.
You forgot that he believe that Islam is a religion of peace!