Obama's 1st budget CUT the deficit by 8 percent. All but Keith Olbermann missed this story

[ProgressiveEconomist]

President Obama's first budget covers the fiscal year October 2009 thru September 2010. Dubya's last budget covered the fiscal year October 2008 thru September 2009, and set a defisit record of 1.4 trillion dollars.

Last night on Keith Olbermann's MSNBC show, I heard that President Obama's first budget had REDUCED Dubya's last deficit by 8 percent.

I searched Google News for this story, but it was not there. So I went to the source of the story, the August 2010 Monthly Treasuy Statement at http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0810.pdf and found that, as usual, Keith was exactly right (see the details below).

The lack of reporting of this story IMO is just STUNNING.

Most disturbing is the Bloomberg coverage of the monthly Treasury report. It did NOT say that President Obama had reduced the deficit by 8 percent from where Dubya left it.

Instead, INCREDIBLY, it stated, (at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-13/budget-deficit-in-u-s-narrows-13-to-90-5-billion-on-rising-tax-receipts.html ):

"The gap for the fiscal year that started in October was $1.26 trillion compared with $1.37 trillion last year at the same time. The economic recovery has helped generate more tax revenue for the Treasury, even as the Congressional Budget Office forecasts the deficit this fiscal year will reach $1.34 trillion, THE SECOND-LARGEST ON RECORD." (my emphasis)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0810.pdf, "TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS of dollars)"

1,370,517 DEFICIT/SURPLUS YTD October 2008 - August 2009 = 1,415,724 - 45,207
1,259,597 DEFICIT/SURPLUS YTD October 2009 - August 2010
---------
110,920 = 8 percent lower

[ejpoeta]

1. it doesn't fit in with the story line. dems raise the deficit.

dems cause all the problems. it is no surprise. it's good news to hear. i haven't heard it anywhere.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

3. 'Haven't heard it anywhere'. Not even from campaigning Democrats. That's what

get me.

[jaxx]

2. That ought to drive the nopers nuts.

Good news and thanks for posting. Rec.

[bushisanidiot]

4. Keith needs to repeat it until it's at least picked up by the other left-leaning

news outlets.. Rachael and Ed could pick it up. Then MAYBE Tweety will mention it.

But Keith needs to push this until someone LISTENS and REPORTS it in the MSM!!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

6. Well said. But where are the Democrats running for office? IMO THEY should be

pushing this news. What are they waiting for? The election's only 7 weeks away.

[dennis4868]

5. The media cannot report....

facts that go against their narrative....that would mess everything up....move on, no story here......

[ProgressiveEconomist]

21. "All the news that fits, we print"

[csziggy]

26. Fox Network (not News) originally had a slogan for their news breaks

"All the news we think you should hear."

That was years before they had a News division, but it gave me a heads up on where their minds were.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

31. Kick!

[City Lights]

7. The corporate #(*$% media is a huge part of the problem.

The multi-headed beast needs to be overthrown.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

20. You mean the "liberal media"?

[girl gone mad]

8. The deficit commission should immediately be disbanded.

With all of the private sector deleveraging currently taking place, this is the wrong time to be shrinking the deficit.

[Cant trust em]

11. Hooray! Now we're only $1.26 trillion in the red!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJOjTNuuEVw

[ProgressiveEconomist]

12. Much of Obama's deficit, unlike Dubya's, is CYCLICAL and will disappear

when the economy recovers. See the chart at http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

[Cant trust em]

17. That may be, but until we're in better fiscal health...

I think that its a great idea to take a serious look at which programs are working and which ones aren't. If programs aren't working then we should cut them and/or reallocate those resources to more efficient purposes, which could be other government programs.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

18. 'If programs aren't working then we should cut them'. Always a great idea. And I'm

sure you and I could come up with a list of candidates for saving hundreds of billions a year PDQ. For example, I'd start with zero-based budgeting of military bases, both domestic and overseas. Why do we still have so many big bases in Europe, two generations after the threat there ended?

[ProgressiveEconomist]

19. Take a look at the budget by agency, further down at the same link from the OP:

http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0810.pdf, "Table 3. Summary of Receipts and Outlays of the U.S. Government <$ millions>"

The right-hand column is the "Budget Estimate for the Full Fiscal Year 2010:"

IMO, Defense ($687 billion) and Agriculture ($140 billion) must be rife with hundreds of billions in corporate welfare, and Homeland Security ($52 billion) has to be a Dubya/Lieberman sinkhole of fairly-recently-created waste.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Outlays
140,209 Department of Agriculture
15,960 Department of Commerce
686,808 Department of Defense-Military

97,388 Department of Education
32,523 Department of Energy
863,864 Department of Health and Human Services

51,790 Department of Homeland Security
61,176 Department of Housing and Urban Development
12,155 Department of the Interior

29,866 Department of Justice
180,648 Department of Labor
25,779 Department of State

85,425 Department of Transportation
115,144 Department of Veterans Affairs
9,000 Corps of Engineers

54,002 Other Defense Civil Programs
10,530 Environmental Protection Agency
715 Executive Office of the President

1,782 General Services Administration
21,297 International Assistance Program
19,364 National Aeronautics and Space Administration

7,092 National Science Foundation
71,528 Office of Personnel Management
5,992 Small Business Administration

419,732 Department of the Treasury:Interest on Treasury Debt Securities (Gross)
73,621 Department of the Treasury:Interest on Treasury Debt SecuritiesOther
768,061 Social Security Administration

-9,260 Other Independent Agencies
7,875 Allowances
-189,729 Undistributed Offsetting Receipts: Interest

-79,980 Undistributed Offsetting Receipts: Other

3,602,955 Total Outlays

3,045,548 (On-Budget)
557,407 (Off-Budget)

-1,471,300 Surplus (+) or Deficit (-)
-1,545,057 (On-Budget)
+73,757 (Off-Budget)
1 These estimates are based on the FY 2011 Mid- Session Review, released by the Office of Management and Budget on July 23, 2010.
Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding

[global1]

9. Why Isn't The White House Shouting This Out? Why Doesn't Gibbs Insert This Fact.......

in one of his answers to the MSM during the daily gaggle? Why didn't this Goolsby guy make this comment and instead he made the comment that unemployment will continue to remain high? Why aren't the Dems campaigning on this to counteract the Repugs wanting to extend the tax breaks for everyone and not let them expire on the rich? Why? Why? Why???????????????

[melm00se]

10. because if they start to trumpet it

folks will very quickly notice/learn that while the President submits the budget, it requires that Congress vote and pass the budget.

Once the People figure that out, the political games that both sides of the aisle play will be exposed for the bullshit it is and the truth will dawn: it's not just Republicans or just Democrats at fault here...it is the entire political structure irrespective of their proclaimed ideologies.

Don't believe me? this whole thread is evidence: "President Obama's first budget covers the fiscal year October 2009 thru September 2010. Dubya's last budget covered the fiscal year October 2008 thru September 2009, and set a defisit(sic) record of 1.4 trillion dollars."

"Bush's budget" couldn't have gotten thru his budget with support and collusion of Congress...
"Obama's budget" couldn't have gotten thru his budget with support and collusion of Congress...

Instead of pointing fingers at 1 individual, place the indictment where it belongs: on the politicians who merrily vote us deeper and deeper into the financial hole.

[Hannah Bell]

15. +100.

[Statistical]

29. Because it isn't true and anyone who reads the report would see that in about 3 seconds.

FY 2010 federal deficit will increase by $1.47 trillion which is $100 million more than the $1.37 trillion in FY 2009.

[scheming daemons]

13. K&R

[Scurrilous]

14. K & R

:thumbsup:

[blondeatlast]

16. By miss, you mean "deliberatly ignored," of course. nt

[Blue_Tires]

27. +1

[ProgressiveEconomist]

30. Kick!

[Scurrilous]

22. K & R

:thumbsup:

[ProgressiveEconomist]

23. Kick!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

24. Kick!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

25. Where did that Bloomberg wording come from? Instead of "CUT

FROM LAST YEAR", they said (see the end of the OP), "the CBO forecasts the deficit this year will reach ... THE SECOND LARGEST ON RECORD."

IMO, that has to come from an editor under strict instruction from his boss, not from an author.

[Statistical]

28. Take a look at table 2 (includes on & off budget figures). Deficit increased by $100 million

FY 2009 (full year) -1,370,517,000,000
FY 2010 (full year) -1,471,300,000,000
FY 2011 (full year) -1,416,195,000,000

FY 2010 (ytd) -1,259,597,000,000

Apples to apples federal deficit spending increased by $100 million this year.