Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: softengine
Our country faces a number of critical issues we must address in coming years. The easiest to fix is (a) excessive government spending and (b) illegal immigration – if, and only if, Republicans are in office.

This is what is happening with Bush and the Republicans in charge:

However, Cato's fiscal analyst Veronique de Rugy notes: "The current president easily eclipses his father on federal spending growth." De Rugy and Cato researcher Tad DeHaven calculate that in real, or inflation-adjusted terms, non-defense discretionary outlays will rise about 20.8 percent in George W. Bush's first three years in office (through FY2004). That growth far exceeds the 11.6 percent growth in the first three years of former President Bush's administration. Indeed, the current president's three-year real increase exceeds Jimmy Carter's term (13.8 percent), Ronald Reagan's first term (-13.5 percent), Reagan's second term (-3.2 percent), Bill Clinton's first term (-0.7 percent), and Clinton's second term (8.2 percent). See table for details.

Gridlock sounds pretty good until a real conservative can be elected in 2008.

69 posted on 01/31/2004 8:18:12 PM PST by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Ol' Sparky
Yes indeedy.
142 posted on 01/31/2004 9:38:28 PM PST by sauropod (Better to have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: Ol' Sparky
Well, let's see why spending has increased 20% under the current presidency:

A. 9-11. (This alone, according to various reports, cost the US Economy roughly $90 billion. (Immediate impact)

B. Increased spending on the Military for a build-up of B.

C. WOT (roughly $150 billion in the last 2 years)

D. Inherited a recession from the previous president.

If these 2 things didn't impact the economy, then nothing would have. Nothing shakes spending by consumers like a threat on their life. So, if I may ask, how could we as a country overcome all these things without an increase in spending?

294 posted on 02/01/2004 6:20:23 AM PST by Maigrey ("I wasn't disengaged. I was bored as hell and my mother told me never to interrupt." -Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: Ol' Sparky
Cato's fiscal analyst Veronique de Rugy...and Cato researcher Tad DeHaven....

And clearly these dimbulbs fail to realize that in our Constitutional form of government no President can spend ANY money whatsoever. A President can impound funds temporarilly, but no President can possibly do that as standard policy and practice, and govern anything else effectively. Andrew Jackson's methods come to mind. These fellows do their position a major disservice to write so carelessly.

Even Stephan Moore of Cato knows better than to spout this kind of idiocy.

332 posted on 02/01/2004 8:57:45 AM PST by Agamemnon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson