The fiscal liberal

February 9th, 2008 7:10 pm · 1 comment

That would be the guy now in the White House:

If President Bush’s budget for fiscal 2009 is approved in its current form, U.S. government spending will have increased by more than $1.2 trillion since President Clinton left office; adjusted for inflation, that’s a 35% increase. Bush has increased spending at three times the rate Clinton did when he was president, and also has given us the biggest defense budget since World War II — and that’s regularly budgeted defense spending, not counting funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Hmmm. And what about that defense budget, innyway?

Of Bush’s $987.6 billion in discretionary spending, more than half — $515.4 billion — would go to the Pentagon, but that doesn’t include any war funding. To be sure, the president did request $75.8 billion in emergency funding, of which $70 billion is targeted for the war in Iraq and fighting terrorism, with the remainder going toward hurricane relief for the Gulf Coast. However, because this amount received an emergency designation, it is not included in the deficit projections.

So, you have to love the way this works: Hey, the deficit is only this - but “this” doesn’t include the cost of our wars. Because, as Matt Yglesias notes, we seem to have this idea that defense spending doesn’t really count as spending. It does, of course - but mention this, and teh terrorists win.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • DZone
  • ThisNext
  • MisterWong
  • Wists

  1 comment  Tags: Defense spending · Budget

There is currently 1 comment on this blog post
View Topic | Comment on this blog
Artie See
2/9/08
6:56 PM
What is wrong with the world when the Democrats are the party of fiscal restraint?

GW Bush and his followers talk the talk, but the figures Gil quotes proves that they refuse to walk the walk.

You don't have to look much further than Lancaster to see the same: Republican State Sen. Gib Armstrong is the same kind of lower-taxes-while-increasing-spending politician that GW Bush is. This is why I am convinced Paul Thibault will win the Republican primary for Gib Armstrong's Senate seat, since Thibault proved during his terms as County Commissioner that he can be counted on to spend, spend, spend just like Gib Armstrong does.

Former Lancaster mayor Charlie Smithgall, a Republican, for all intents and purposes doubled Lancaster City spending during his eight years in office. Smithgall did increase taxes, but not enough to pay for his increased spending. Like GW Bush, Smithgall left a legacy of deficit spending. Consequently, current Lancaster mayor Rick Gray, a Democrat, has been forced to severely restrain spending in an attempt to get the city budget's "structural deficit" under control.

GW Bush has left the U.S. Government with a "structural deficit". No matter who the next president is, no matter what party they claim allegiance to, they will have no choice but to deal with this issue. Even John McCain would likely be forced to raise taxes; there is NO practical alternative.
View Topic | Comment on this blog