Bush to charge lawmakers $200 for budget hard copy

President Bush’s budget proposal has never been popular on Capitol Hill, but this year’s request comes with an added layer of insult: a price tag of $200.

In the past, the administration gave away about 3,000 free copies of its budget proposal to lawmakers, federal agencies and members of the media. But next week, when Bush submits the last of his eight budget requests to Congress, the White House only plans to post it on the Internet.

{mosads}Lawmakers may read the budget online without cost. But those accustomed to holding a copy in their hands — or distributing multiple copies to their staffs to pore over the details — are going to have to dig into their own pockets and hand over some cash.

At 2,142 pages, last year’s budget would amount to nearly 10 cents a page.

“It’s pennywise and pound-foolish,” said Rep. Bob Etheridge (N.C.), a Democratic member of the House Budget Committee. “I don’t think as a member of Congress that I should have to take money out of my account [for the president’s budget request].”

Sean Kevelighan, spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), touted the administration’s efforts to save money and do its part to save the environment.

“The e-budget is an effort to save taxpayer dollars and reduce unnecessary paper copies,” he said. “Our decision to embrace an e-budget and forgo paper copies will encourage others to make the same choice.”

Members of Congress may pay from their office accounts instead of their own pockets, but that’s a small consolation.

Lawmakers say their office funds are already stretched thin and their staffs are underpaid. Now they may find themselves facing a difficult choice: Should they shell out hundreds of dollars for a document that leaves most readers yawning? Or should they save the money to buy an extra plane trip back to their home district or pizza for staffers working late at night? {mospagebreak}

Most elected officials view carefully scrutinizing the budget proposal as a primary job requirement, and though charging for copies doesn’t prevent them from doing so, one could argue that the practice could make the search for unpopular items a more difficult task.

Lawmakers say that paper budgets are easier to read for several reasons: They can hold open multiple copies to compare different sections; they can attach easy-to-see bookmarks to the pages; and they can distribute them to staff for close review.

{mosads}Some Democrats raised the question of whether the administration may be obscuring the controversial details of its budget proposal by making hardcopies tougher to obtain. “It makes it easier for them to hide the details,” griped a Democratic aide.

A number of lawmakers were not even aware that they are to be charged this year for the budget. They responded to the news with frowns, knitted eyebrows and expressions of disbelief.

Etheridge said he was “all for being frugal and saving money” but questioned whether requiring members to pay for their own copies would do much to improve relations between the branches.

“I would certainly think they would want members of Congress who are voting on it to get a look at it,” he said, questioning who in the administration would receive free copies.

Other Democrats scoffed at the administration’s avowed concern for saving taxpayer money, not to mention the environment.

“It’s Mickey Mouse,” said Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), a senior member of the Budget Committee. “Bush has never submitted a balanced budget to Congress in his entire presidency, and he’s playing Mickey Mouse with Congress.”

Kaptur cited a litany of examples she said showed the president’s lack of concern for fiscal responsibility.

“America is importing a billion more barrels of petroleum a year, 80 percent of our treasury securities are bought by foreign interests,” she said.

Even Republicans grumbled about the prospect of having to read online a document exceeding 2,000 pages. {mospagebreak}

“I think people who request a copy of the budget should be given it gratis,” said Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.), another Budget panel member. “You want something in your hand so you can thumb through it and mark it up and reference it.”

Garrett is skeptical of the business vision of entrepreneurs such as Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon.com, who are hawking digital books and claim that paper versions will someday become a thing of the past.

{mosads}“The whole idea of books going online, I don’t think it’s going to catch favor,” he said.

Kevelighan, OMB’s spokesman, expressed little surprise that what the administration considers a tweak to the budget process might prompt groans at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

“The notion of change in general is an inconvenience,” he said.

Kevelighan noted that posting the budget online allows lawmakers to search it easily for key words. He said that also saves them from worrying about “leftover copies that can clutter up the office.”

The perks offered by technological innovation, however, seemed lost on Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.), chairman of the House Budget Committee.

“Hell,” he said when told of the ease of keyword searches, “I guess this is progress.

“I’d much prefer a paper copy,” he added.

Spratt said he would likely buy 10 copies of the budget for his committee, a $2,000 expense.