From the Sept. 28, 1905 NYT article "Give us $25,000,000 says Board of Education" :

Commissioner Collier, who presented the budget, said that the estimate was the lowest the Finance Committee could frame. He said the increase was due largely to the increases in teachers' salaries, according to the Davis law, and the appointment of new teachers.

"If the appropriation is cut down so that substitutes will have to be employed in place of regular teachers," he said, "this board will not be responsible for any of the harm that must necessarily follow. To continue the work of the department properly we must have every dollar we ask for."

The rhetoric hasn't changed a single bit in 100 years. Perhaps this is because the rhetoric is almost always successful?

Another statement in the article describes a situation you wouldn't see in any legislature in this great land:

When the budget was presented to the board many of the Commissioners whistled softly. It called for an appropriation of $25,178,540.96 just $3,181,523.19 more than was awarded last year - and the board had to fight hard for that appropriation.

I like the idea of politicians, or anybody else spending public money, emanating the "soft whistle." I let out one after Bush's call for $200,000,000,000 to rebuild New Orleans.

How about the appropriation being listed to the penny? Today, appropriation numbers are so huge that we round up (or down) to the nearest BILLION. If Bush had asked for $200,000,000,112.53 would that have rattled more cages?