Posted on 10/09/2005 7:59:30 AM PDT by alessandrofiaschi
While the data show that all presidents presided over net increases in spending, George W. Bush is shown to be one of the biggest spenders of them all, even outpacing Lyndon B. Johnson in terms of discretionary spending.
An excerpt from the report: "The increase in discretionary spending - that is, all nonentitlement programs - in Bush's first term was 48.5 percent in nominal terms. That's more than twice as large as the increase in discretionary spending during Clinton's entire two terms (21.6 percent), and just higher than Lyndon Johnson's entire discretionary spending spree (48.3 percent)."
This Country would have been so much better off with a President John Kerry or a President Howard Dean or.....
Spending needs to be cut; however, I am not sure CATO is sufficiently compensating for Bush having to deal with 9/11 at a time when the country was in recession.
He chose to spend his way out these events; IMO, he had no alternative.
If that is your only measure. I was looking at total spending.
Yes, Bush spends too much. He hasn't controlled our borders either. Sounds like a lot of other Presidents too.
President Bush cut taxes to get the country out of a recession and get the economy moving, and that was the right thing to do. However, he also boosted spending enormously and for that he has no excuse. He could easily have vetoed bloated spending bills from Congress and his vetoes would have been upheld. Pretty soon Congress would have gotten the message that they'd better pare things down themselves or they would not get any spending passed. Instead Bush has sent Congress the message that they can add all the pork they want and never give a thought as to whether Bush will veto it.
So let's see, Bush has signed McCain-Feingold; enacted steel tariffs; strong-armed Congress into approving the fantastically expensive Medicare drug entitlement program; signed an enormous farm subsidy program; joined forces with Senator Kennedy to greatly boost federal spending on education; signed the grease-laden transportation bill; etc.
A Republican Congress which was at constant war with President Clinton was able to slow down the increase in federal spending to the point where we had a cash-flow budget surplus and the current national debt was being paid down. The combination of a Republican President and a Republican Congress has resulted in skyrocketing spending, huge yearly budget deficits and a giant upward spike in the national debt.
That's "compassionate conservatism". That's today's Republican Party.
While I don't agree with the concept that the Gov't. way overspends, we should not ignore the financial consequences of 9/11 at the time we were in recession.
The discount rate wasn't reduced to around 1% for no reason.
PING
LOL
This Country would have been so much better off with a President John Kerry or a President Howard Dean or.....
"I am not sure CATO is sufficiently compensating for Bush having to deal with 9/11 at a time when the country was in recession. He chose to spend his way out these events; IMO, he had no alternative."
I'm not sure Cato is cpompensating at all.
I am extremely unhappy with the defecict.
But clearly 9/11 is a major factor in the defecit.
He's also matched Reagan in tax cuts. Which would be fine except for, you know, all the spending.
hmmm, Bush or a Lib/Dem?
WTF is the difference when it comes to spending? Bush beats 'em hands down.
Draft Mike Pence, 2008.
The thing is that Bush is fighting a war, much like LBJ was, and Bush also has to deal with a destroyed american city, as well as the direct & indirect impact of kamikazie bombers in downtown manhattan.
Some people seem to think being 'principled' means turning off their brains at the door. A shame.
Non-discretionary, is by definition, on autopilot.
Straw man. Did they say they were unneccessary? Anyway, lets you forget, Johnson was also fighting a war. One that involved more troops than the Iraq war, and he did so while the Cold War was raging.
OK fine. Does that mean that what they are saying here is not true?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.