Deficits are not falling as Repub talking points suggest

[joeprogressive]

Clearly Bush used 2009 to avoid the reality that Democrats would capitalize on broken promises. It is also a sham that Bush waited until he had pumped deficits into record territory before promising to cut them in half. Big deal, even if he did pull it off, we would be spending much more in excess of our annual budget than when Clinton left office.

This article shows a wide disconnect from the study and the CBO. I thought the CBO was supposed to be somewhat non-partisan. What's up?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050910/ap_on_go_co/democrats_deficit;_ylt=Aiif8OLhEN56N5OW8uLgA.UGw_IE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

[yankeedem]

1. The 50% reduction

was always fradulent because it doesn't include Iraq and Afghanistan.
Why not run surpluses like Clinton did? Oh, that's right, the rich pay too much, lets give them a BIG tax cut.

[natrat]

2. i resent any implication that fearless leader's government

would lie

[Vickers]

3. Really! Why do these folks hate America?

:spank:

I think it's hilarious that George would think halving a problem he created is some kind of ACCOMPLISHMENT. :rofl:

[snippy]

4. Bush's deficit spending is typical for a republican president.

A comparison of government spending and the annual federal deficits accumulated since 1960 under republican presidents and under democratic presidents shows that republicans are bigger spenders and run much larger deficits than democrats. Bush has been about average as a big spender for republican presidents. If Bush was a democrat he would be the biggest spending democrat since WWII.

The Kennedy/Johnson administrations accumulated deficits of $53.5 billion or $269.9 billion in constant 2000 dollars. Annual spending by the federal government averaged 18.8% of GDP and the annual deficit never exceeded 3% of GDP.

The Nixon/Ford administrations accumulated deficits of $265.5 billion or $798.5 billion in constant 2000 dollars. Annual spending by the federal government averaged 19.9% of GDP and the annual deficit exceeded 3% of GDP 2 times.

The Carter administration accumulated deficits of $252.7 billion or $519.4 billion in constant 2000 dollars. Annual spending by the federal government averaged 21.2% of GDP and the annual deficit never exceeded 3% of GDP.

The Reagan administration accumulated deficits of $1,412.2 billion or $2,082.3 billion in constant 2000 dollars. Annual spending by the federal government averaged 22.3% of GDP and the annual deficit exceeded 3% of GDP 7 times.

The Bush the Lesser administration accumulated deficits of $1,035.8 billion or $1,241.5 billion in constant 2000 dollars. Annual spending by the federal government averaged 21.9% of GDP and the annual deficit exceeded 3% of GDP 4 times.

The Clinton administration accumulated a surplus of $62.5 billion or $15.9 billion in constant 2000 dollars. Annual spending by the federal government averaged 19.6% of GDP and the annual deficit never exceeded 3% of GDP.

The Bush the Liar administration has in just three years accumulated deficits of $947.5 billion. and projects additional accumulated deficits during his administration of $1,612.5 billion. Annual spending by the federal government has averaged 19.7% of GDP (19.9% with the current fiscal year estimate) and the annual deficit has exceeded 3% of GDP 2 times and will again this fiscal year and the next.

Thus, of the slightly more than $3.9 trillion in accumulated deficits since 1960, more than $3.6 trillion has been accumulated under republican presidents while only about $244 billion has been accumulated under democratic presidents. In constant 2000 dollars the numbers are more than $5.8 trillion in total accumulated deficits with about $5.1 trillion accumulated under republican presidents and about $700 billion accumulated under democratic presidents.

And of the 15 times since 1960 that the annual deficit has exceeded 3% of GDP, every single time it was under a republican president.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/sheets/hist01z3.xls(Note: The first year of a presidential term operates under the budget and appropriations of the last year of the preceeding presidential term, except for any supplemental appropriation bills passed during such first year. The summary above does not include any such supplemental bills.)

[karynnj]

5. Also as many Senators have pointed out the budget is NOT honest

The entire Iraq war expenditure is off budget (ie not included in the budget). The deficit is actually significantly higher.

Here were some of Kerry's comments on the budget:

Hold this budget to those simple values: Is it honest? Responsible? Does it create opportunity for all Americans? By any standard this budget fails to measure up, and even sells out our most cherished values.

Surely, when you’re talking about the budget of the United States, honesty at least means actually counting every dollar we’re planning to spend. It sounds simple, it’s what every American does, but this budget doesn’t do it.

Ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are going to cost almost $400 billion over the next ten years. That’s not in the budget. The President’s Social Security scheme will cost over $750 billion over the next ten years. That’s not in the budget. Saving middle-class families from enduring a major tax hike from the Alternative Minimum Tax will cost over $600 billion over ten years. That isn’t in the budget either, and astonishingly, neither is interest on the debt, which not even the most creative accountant would leave out.

http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=234672