Under Bush, spending soars

[Pale Blue Dot]

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/7438982.htm

WASHINGTON - President Bush came to office saying he was a fiscal conservative, but federal spending has skyrocketed on his watch. And it's not just the Pentagon that's getting more federal dollars.

Overall spending is up at least 16 percent since he took office, far more than the 2 percent average annual inflation rate over the same period. According to one recent analysis, the government now spends $20,000 a year for every household in the United States, the most since World War II.

In the meantime, the $236 billion federal surplus Bush inherited in January 2001 has turned into a $374.2 billion deficit.

Today, Bush will usher in another big, new spending program, signing Medicare legislation that creates a prescription-drug benefit for senior citizens at an estimated cost of $400 billion over the next 10 years.

<snip>

This article has cool graphs, too!

[cthrumatrix]

1. repugs are stymied by facts...and the eventual need to tax again

nice going shrub

This should be a "key mantra" for the election.

[pippin]

2. Note: Even the Heritage Foundation

" . . .usually a White House ally, found that 55 percent of the spending increases since Bush took office had nothing to do with defense or homeland security. The Heritage analysis also concluded that spending had reached $20,000 per household."

. . .and "Bush's record is a big disappointment to conservatives, who share his stated goal of a leaner federal government."

DUers need to pay attention to this issue.

[Hobarticus]

10. Bingo

A few intelligent conservative friends are saying they're changing their vote next fall, because of this issue. Gotta jump on it, candidates!!!

[iam]

3. Remember

The liar-in-chief said on national TV that creating/operating the DHS would be REVENUE NEUTRAL. Another damn lie the conservative media is ignoring.

[TrueAmerican]

4. The republican caller on CSPAN this morning

said it was the Democrats loading the bills with Pork Spending. He said that Republicans don't play that game, only democrats.

[central scrutinizer]

6. but,

remind me again which party holds the majority in both houses.

[moondust]

7. That one's easy.

The Republicans currently control the White House and the Congress. If they don't like all that "Democrat pork" then why on earth do they allow it to pass? Amazing. And scary.

[54anickel]

5. Gotta love that last line

"Congress must hold the line on unnecessary spending," he said during a September visit to Kansas City, Mo. "They need to understand that in order to cut the deficits in half, we must have spending discipline in Washington, D.C., and I will insist upon spending discipline."

Right, spending discipline only in areas that benefit the general public over his cronies.

[David__77]

8. There is a strategic benefit.

We can look at this two ways:

1) Higher deficits increase the pressure for spending cuts.
2) Increased spending reflects that the era of "small government" is over in the post-9/11 period.

I think both can be true. I think it's important that we play upon the latter though. We cannot afford, for reasons of national integrity, to cut, cut, cut spending. Government is security.

[Bandit]

9. Tax the Rich ~ They can afford it and I love to hear them squeel

We should tell it like we feel it. Tax the Rich. Who is "The Rich" they ask? Anyone making over a hundred thousand dollars a year or a hundred and fifty for a household income. Make more than that and pay a good portion back into the country that allowed you to make so much with it's highways and postal service and police protection to guard all your money for you and fire protection, and air traffic controllers, etc. etc. Without all the government services available these people would have nothing.

[David__77]

11. Yes...

I do think thought that for certain purposes it would be better to stress "millionaires," meaning those making even higher incomes. I would like to make a computer program, premised upon sound economic principles, that would calculate federal revenue based upon varying income tax schemes.