Here's a Web site that's fun -- sort of. It may also leave some people more than a little steamed. It's called "Federal Bduget Trade-Offs," and it's the work of an outfit called the National Priorities Project.
You choose your congressional district, then choose from a list of federal spending priorities -- "War in Iraq," "Tax cuts for the rich," etc. -- and find out what your district could have had instead. A sample:
The $421.2 million for the war in Iraq -- so far -- from Rep. Jim Costa's 20th District would have paid for 46 new elementary schools or 6,551 additional elementary school teachers.
The $127.8 million in lost revenue from tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans would have paid for 2,348 additional public safety officers, or health care for 52,992 people in Rep. George Radanovich's 19th District.
Check it out.
This is a much narrower version of a system that let you allocate the whole federal budget -- a much more persuasive project I thought, because it has all the sacred cows in one place.
The budget tool you developed for FUSD's finances was a far less political, more informative document. http://www.fresnobee.com/static/2005news/fusd/fusdbudget.html
i'm recalling Eisenhower's farewell address, where he cautioned us to beware "the military- industrial complex." Fifty years later,you must include the mainstream media and both political parties in the "complex." When Reagan took office, fewer than 50 congresstional districts had military contracts. After 2 terms, the number was increased to more than 400 districts! Yep, she's a goner.