Ever wonder just how much that whole conflict in Iraq is costing you? Besides the social, moral, and sheer human cost of the war, the invasion and occupation has taken quite the financial toll as well–now Bush has requested an additional $153 billion to supplement the previous 2008 supplemental spending for the war. If Congress approves Bush’s funding request, the spending on the Iraq war will have reached $617 billion.
But where is that sizeable hunk of taxpayer dollars coming from? How much does, say, Idaho pay compared with New York? A new interactive map from the Center for American Progress gives the exact breakdown of spending by state, for both pre-supplement numbers and the total if Bush’s request is approved.
North Dakota has paid the least at of any state–with an estimated total of $739.6 million if the supplement passes. So far North Dakotan taxpayers have ponied up $550.2 million.
California pays the most for the war by a long-shot. The Golden State has paid $57.8 billion for the war already, and if the supplement passes, its estimated contribution will go up to $77.4 billion. Gives the nickname a whole new meaning, huh?
To make matters worse, Bush’s 2008 budget cuts major spending on domestic programs, such local schools, disease research and prevention and infrastructure maintenance. Bush has indicated that he will veto any increases to the budget, as it is already $60 billion over the discretionary spending levels. So where’s that $60 billion going? The budget is heavy on defense, military construction, homeland security, and foreign operations. CAP Senior Fellow Scott Lilly dishes all the dirt on the budget shenanigans in his column this week - explaining the ways that the Bush administration and their congressional allies’ are derailing of the process.
With children’s healthcare, faulty bridges and major economic barriers all hanging on the line, the administration seems intent on sending even more money into a conflict that isn’t working. Think about that next April 15.