ADVERTISEMENT

Wis. budget committee considers stimulus spending

By ASSOCIATED PRESS   Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 11:25 a.m.
ADVERTISEMENT

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Spending federal stimulus money on everyone from children with disabilities to fish farmers is up for approval before a Wisconsin legislative committee.

The Legislature's budget committee on Thursday is scheduled to vote on approving more than $104 million in stimulus spending.

The largest chunk, $93 million, would go toward local road and bridge projects, including $4.6 million to help build a new Stillwater Bridge connecting Wisconsin to Minnesota across the St. Croix River.

Also up for approval is $1.8 million to replace the 43-year-old car ferry between Cassville and Guttenberg, Iowa, and $3 million for programs helping infants and toddlers with disabilities.

There's also $27,000 to assist fish farmers deal with high feed costs.




reader COMMENTS
Click here to view reader comments
(12)
dqandhallie
Aug 27, 2009 at 10:18 p.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Zoom
Aug 27, 2009 at 4:45 p.m.
Suggest removal

From The Times February 23, 2008

The three trillion dollar war

From the unhealthy brew of emergency funding, multiple sets of books, and chronic underestimates of the resources required to prosecute the war, we have attempted to identify how much we have been spending - and how much we will, in the end, likely have to spend. The figure we arrive at is more than $3 trillion. Our calculations are based on conservative assumptions. They are conceptually simple, even if occasionally technically complicated. A $3 trillion figure for the total cost strikes us as judicious, and probably errs on the low side. Needless to say, this number represents the cost only to the United States. It does not reflect the enormous cost to the rest of the world, or to Iraq.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment...

Zoom
Aug 27, 2009 at 4:37 p.m.
Suggest removal

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The total economic impact of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is estimated at $1.6 trillion by 2009, a congressional committee said in a report released Tuesday.

That is nearly double the $804 billion in direct war costs the White House requested so far from Congress, the Democratic-led Joint Economic Committee said.

The committee estimated $1.3 trillion in war costs by the end of 2008 for Iraq, and the remainder for Afghanistan.

The total war costs could grow to $3.5 trillion by 2017, the committee estimated.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/13/h...

Zoom
Aug 27, 2009 at 4:28 p.m.
Suggest removal

janevillean is absolutely right. More history revisionists I see. Bush had the U.S. invade Iraq because there MIGHT be WMD's that would threaten the U.S. Guess what? There were none. That's fact. The weapons Saddam used on the Kurds were no threat the the U.S. Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, et. al. have already said there were none. Oops!

raystone, Obama is not increasing troop levels in Iraq. In fact, they will be reduced as soon as the Iraqi people can take care of themselves. You can thank Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld for diverting troops to an unjust Iraq war, when they should have been in Afghanistan all along. Remember that guy who funded the 9/11 attack? (no, it wasn't Saddam)
Hundreds of thousands of civillians have been killed in Iraq since we invaded, and for what?

dqandhallie, please enlighten us on the return the U.S. is getting for spending trillions of dollars in Iraq, and losing the lives of thousands of our brave soldiers. What will we have to show for it 10 years from now? In contrast, spending money to stimlulate the economy in a recession by building roads, bridges, etc. will be a benefit for years to come. By the way, if you didn't like the last tax cut by Obama, I'm sure the government would be happy to take your money back.

dqandhallie
Aug 27, 2009 at 4:05 p.m.
Suggest removal

all janesvillian can think of is spending on useless stuff that gets us no return for our buck such as people that set on thier porches and have never contributed to this great country . i say bunk to that. Let them fend for themselves and use our money wisely or better yet cut taxes and let us keep it for our own use.

tiredofhearingit
Aug 27, 2009 at 3:05 p.m.
Suggest removal

raystone; did you ever consider they know something we don't - called classified information & there's a reason we're increasing troops in these areas. Is there ANY justification in YOUR mind to goto war or are all reasons "unconstitutional" to you?

janesvilledean; history will show IF Bush, Clinton, Ted Kennedy .... the list goes on - were correct. To also correct you, it was WMD's not specifically nuclear weapons. He DID have them, he used them on his own people. You might know that if you would have went there rather than playing Mon morning QB from your living room. How long did it take to find King Tut's tomb? - just wondering because the landscape changes in that sandbox every few hours - how long did it take to find Navy pilot Scott Speicher & his plane - and we knew about where he crashed! He went down & we started looking the next morning and couldnt find him. 18 years - that's how long. so just wait.

raystone
Aug 27, 2009 at 2:38 p.m.
Suggest removal

Janesvillian - Bush unconstitutionally invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, Obama is continuing Bush's foreign policies: Building a U.S. military base in Iraq the size of a large city, surging troop levels in Afghanistan, ordering drone air attacks in Pakistan killing suspected terrorists and innocent civilians.

newsread5
Aug 27, 2009 at 1:52 p.m.
Suggest removal

Sorry Janesvillean, but you throw figures around that are totally baloney. Site a reliable source and not some left wing blog that you usually use.

janesvillean
Aug 27, 2009 at 12:04 p.m.
Suggest removal

Sure could use that $3 trillion we spent in Iraq right about now. Many times more expensive than the stimulus. Did anyone say boo about making our grandchildren pay for a wild goose chase that found not one single nuclear weapon? Yet a bit of money for disability makes you angry. What kind of person has those sorts of priorities?

raystone
Aug 27, 2009 at 11:44 a.m.
Suggest removal

Spending now for our children to be in unsustainable debt. The next generation will be the first in American history to have a lower standard of living than their parents.

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT