The Bush administration diverted $700 million from appropriations meant for the war Afghanistan and spent it to prepare for our invasion of Iraq. This much we know. We’re also beginning to understand that the White House did not consult with lawmakers about the transfer, as the law required.
But Dems on the Hill are noting that the $700 million diversion is really just the tip of the iceberg. The Bush administration hasn’t been keeping Congress informed on how $40 billion of our money is being spent in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Two leading congressional Democrats said Monday that President Bush had failed to give Congress enough detail on how $40 billion had been used for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and for fighting terrorists. They asked him to provide the information.
The Democrats also said that despite legal requirements to do so, the Bush administration had not consulted with lawmakers about how it was distributing much of the money and had failed to provide quarterly reports on the expenditures.
“Transparency in this regard is critical. We need a full accounting of the entire $40 billion” fund, said the letter by Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, top Democrats on the Senate and House Appropriations committees.
The controversial $700 million transfer apparently came from a $40 billion anti-terrorism package that Congress approved shortly after the 9/11 attacks. But that appropriation still required the administration to consult with lawmakers about how the money was spent. So far, that doesn’t appear to have happened.
The White House said, in response, that the Congress gave the administration “unprecedented flexibility” in dealing with the funds. Maybe so, but Dems are arguing that the administration took “flexibility” to mean “we can do anything we want without telling Congress.”
Mr. Byrd and Mr. Obey said that contrary to the requirements of law, there appeared to have been no consultation with Congress on how $20 billion specifically handed over to the president for his allocation had been distributed. They also said the administration had not submitted required quarterly reports on the use of the entire $40 billion for almost a year.
The Byrd/Obey letter specifically said:
* The law required the White House budget office to send Congress quarterly reports on the use of the money, but the last report was sent May 9, 2003, covering expenditures through February 2003.
* The law required the administration to consult Congress about the use of the funds, but Byrd and Obey said they have no record the Pentagon consulted Congress on the use of $178 million that funded 21 Pentagon projects in the Persian Gulf region to “support the global war on terrorism.”
* On Sept. 30, 2003, the administration notified Congress it was allocating $290 million from the emergency fund to support the government in Afghanistan. But the May 9 report indicated only $21 million remained in the emergency fund.
“While we had no objection to the support for the government of Afghanistan, your report begs the question: From whence came the money?” the letter stated.
Good question. Any chance the White House will respond with a good answer? No, I don’t think so either.