Last week Congress reconvened for a second lame duck session. They succeeded in stripping controversial tax language from the bill and on Dec. 8 the President finally signed it, officially bringing the much delayed FY 2005 appropriations process to a close. The omnibus bill combines nine appropriations bills Congress was unable to finish working on before the end of the fiscal year, along with thousands of provisions and riders.

Congress had to return after the omnibus passed initially to take out a provision giving appropriators unprecedented access to individuals’ tax returns. The outcry over this provision exposed the fact that lawmakers themselves did not know the content of what was inside the massive, 3,000-plus paged bill. It is deeply troubling that year after year the appropriations process is reduced to passing a range of bills as part of a huge, complex, and expensive omnibus.

The FY 2005 spending bill significantly affects the funding levels of most federal agencies and programs. The Washington Post published a good synopsis of the highlights of the bill. The bill cuts all non-defense discretionary programs across the board, which was done in order to keep the final spending figure within the $822 billion budget cap Congress and the administration had agreed upon.

As BNA News Services reports, “the $821.9 billion figure allowed Bush to get the big increases he wanted for the Department of Defense and Homeland Security programs but left little for hikes in other programs.” In fact, many programs suffered significant cuts. The Environmental Protection Agency saw their funds cut by $355 million, or 4.2 percent, the Federal Aviation Administration’s budget for safety inspectors and air traffic controllers was cut by $322 million, and Bush’s request for Title I education funding was cut by $607 million, or 9.5 percent. In contrast, the funding set aside for abstinence education programs increased by 28.5 percent, or roughly $30 million.

This overall lean omnibus provides some indication of the administration’s priorities in drafting its proposed FY 2006 budget, due out in early February. The administration has made clear numerous times they plan to cut the deficit in half by 2009. The question that remains is how. If they plan to do so by continuing to squeeze non-defense discretionary spending, millions of Americans will see a reduction in essential government services while the savings will barely put a dent in reducing the deficit. The money our government will save pinching pennies in the budget is relatively small compared with the amount of money President Bush gave away to millionaires in the tax cuts of the first term.

According to the Brookings Institution and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the middle 20 percent of Americans received an average of $647 in 2004 from tax cuts enacted by the government in 2001 and 2003, while people who make above $1 million in annual income received an average of $123,592. Instead of chipping away at small pieces of the deficit by cutting social safety net programs millions of Americans depend on like LIHEAP and Medicaid, President Bush and Congress could make vastly greater strides in deficit reduction by not extending or repealing the first term tax cuts on only those who make above $1 million per year.