Dear WiLL Members,

Please join me in signing this letter to Members of Congress regarding the Fiscal Year 2006 budget resolution.

As a state legislator, I am deeply troubled by the President’s recent FY06 budget request. In his budget, vital programs that improve the livelihood and security of our constituents face serious cuts, while the Defense Department sees another significant budgetary increase.

More federal dollars for the Pentagon Budget -- which DOES NOT include funding for the wars in Iraq and Afganistan -- will not keep Americans truly safe. The President suggests severe cuts to homeland security services like first responders, public health, education, and economic security. These programs are more critical in keeping Americans safe than unnecessary expensive weapons systems funded in the Pentagon budget.

As state legislators, we should take action and respond quickly to the President’s budget request before many of his proposed cuts pass through Congress. Join me by signing your name to this letter to Members of Congress today!

Nan

Nan Grogan Orrock, WiLL President
Georgia State Representative

Please join me in signing this letter to U.S. Senators and Representatives, urging them to redirect the real growth in the Department of Defense budget and nuclear weapons portion of the Department of Energy budget to help fund domestic preparedness in our states (see letter below).

And what about the proposed FY06 federal budget? How will we cut the pie?
More guns, less butter. And housing. And aid to states and localities. And healthcare... Links to some great analyses and information:
Click here to see how the President's proposed budget will impact your state
The budget pie: *Total budget slices  *Discretionary budget slices
* CAP information: "Budget Slashes State and Local Grants"
Also: * 2005 Congressional Schedule

Dear Member of Congress:

As you address the Fiscal Year 2006 budget resolution, we urge you to provide only the inflationary increase to the Defense Department and the nuclear weapons portion of the Department of Energy budget. We support shifting the Administration’s proposed real increase in the Pentagon budget to non-military security--such as domestic preparedness and nonproliferation in order to prevent nuclear materials from falling into the wrong hands.

We understand that when considering FY06 budget priorities, national security is at the top of list in Congress. However, simply increasing funding for the Pentagon budget while cutting funds for other vital programs is not a good tactic for making Americans more secure. In FY05, we are spending $420 billion on the Pentagon. The Administration’s request is $439 billion for FY06, which is a real increase (that above inflationary growth) of $8.2 billion.

We believe this Pentagon increase is unnecessary and not a smart use of federal tax dollars. We know that in addition to the Pentagon’s budget allotment, taxpayers are also expected to pay for the huge costs of funding the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

We are equally troubled that the Administration’s budget request proposes funding cuts for programs that can truly increase security at home. We need increases, not cuts, for our first responders, our police and firefighters, education and job training, public health, and veterans’ health care. Adequate funding for all of these programs, which contribute to the day-to-day security of our citizens, will fall on the shoulders of state budgets.

In addition, although it claims to be committed to nuclear non-proliferation, the Administration is requesting $8.5 million for the nuclear bunker buster and should be spending more than it is for nonproliferation.

We urge you to revise the Administration’s funding requests, which we believe provide Americans with less, not more, security. As state legislators, we are particularly concerned about funding for domestic preparedness because needs unmet by the federal government must be included in our already besieged state budgets. It is our duty to protect our constituents as best we can by training and equipping first responders, enhancing our public health capacities, and improving economic security for working families.

We are requesting more federal funds for these at-home security needs and less for large expensive weapons systems that are funded out of the Pentagon budget. Members of Congress who intend that federal budget priorities truly reflect the security needs of Americans should work to redirect funds from the $8.2 real increase in the Defense Department to domestic preparedness and nonproliferation.

As public leaders from your states, we urge you to make the smartest decisions regarding the safety of our constituents and to work with us to meet the needs of all our citizens.

Sincerely,

WiLL Members