AP Claims Bush Tax Cuts Caused National Debt to Grow by $1.6 Trillion

Newbussters.org ^ | July 17, 2011 | 15:43 | Tom Blumer |

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

In an unbylined update of the latest developments in the budget-tax-spending-debt ceiling discussions in Washington this morning, the Associated Press committed several blunders in attempting to explain what's going on and how we got to where we are. First and foremost was its list identifying "contributors" to the $8.5 trillion growth in the national debt since 2001.

Here's the AP's you-can't make-this-up, Comedy Central-worthy list of debt contributors:

Q: How did the debt grow from $5.8 trillion in 2001 to its current $14.3 trillion?

A: The biggest contributors to the nearly $9 trillion increase over a decade were:

- 2001 and 2003 tax cuts under President George W. Bush: $1.6 trillion.

- Additional interest costs: $1.4 trillion.
- Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: $1.3 trillion.
- Economic stimulus package under Obama: $800 billion.
- 2010 tax cuts (these weren't cuts at all; they were really a continuation of the current income tax structure -- Ed.), a compromise by Obama and Republicans that extended jobless benefits and cut payroll taxes: $400 billion.
- 2003 creation of Medicare's prescription drug benefit: $300 billion.
- 2008 financial industry bailout: $200 billion.
- Hundreds of billions less in revenue than expected since the Great Recession began in December 2007.
- Other spending increases in domestic, farm and defense programs, adding lesser amounts.

So I guess the AP's assertion that the Bush tax cuts were the biggest contributor to the deficit explains why the following graph shows how government collections tanked from 2003-2007:

[Arm_Bears]

Then how come it was so essential to preserve them last December?

[The_Media_never_lie]

Is it true it’s all Bush’s fault?

[The Bronze Titan]

Yep. According to the SOCIALIST and COMMUNIST crowd, we got to keep more of our hard earned money, so THAT’S WHY the Government now has a debt problem!

[the invisib1e hand]

what a great meme. why did it take them so long to haul it out, because its so obviously that?

[BuddhaBrown]

Yes, but...

Those cuts also “created or saved” trillions in other revenue during that period.

[Jim Scott]

The Newsbusters article goes on to prove that federal income rose a total of 44% during the initial Bush tax cut era (2001-2008) rendering the AP claim that the 'Bush tax cuts' (actually just a continuation of then-current tax rates)'caused' the national debt to grow by 1.6 trillion dollars. The transparent attempt to (a) blame Bush and, (b) shield Obama's spending as the real cause of the deficit is pathetic, predictable and, sadly, will probably be swallowed whole by some folks, present company excepted.

[marstegreg]

I see some creative math headed our way. A little fuzzy math and I’m sure Obama will claimed to have actually “saved’ money during his years in office. Just watch...

[griswold3]

Stupid leftist counterfactual theory of causation arguments! This is totally like saying Obama saved us from another Great Depression.

When the tax rates were lowered, they closed loopholes that maintained the historical 18-19% GDP to revenue ratio.

[RowdyFFC]

Wellllllll....NO. Not since $3 trillion or more dollars of debt has been run up in less than 24 months...at a time when we’re short 24 MILLION + taxpayers. And consider that Bush’s $4 trillion of added debt was consumed in 8 years, not 24 months.

And since we’re considering, we need to consider that this shortage of taxpayers began (to the tune of 750,000 employees/month) when the commiecrats took both houses in 2007 and started expanding every commiecrat entitlement welfare program on the books when the country was totally BROKE!...and employers are STILL schluffing off jobs.

[Sudetenland]

That's the standard Democrat line on the extension of "the Bush tax-cuts."

They aren't honest enough to admit that there was no money to spend and the "deficit contribution" of the "tax-cuts" was one of expectations.

Liberals and Democrats were expecting to have all of that money available to spend and the fact that it isn't available is what caused the "deficit contribution" of "the Bush Tax-cut extensions." It never occurs to them not to spend the money they allocated based upon their expectations

It's exactly like expecting a raise and going out and putting a large down payment on a boat. You don't get the raise you were expecting and instead of dropping the purchase, you go ahead and make it anyway and then complain about not getting the raise.

That, in a nut-shell, is liberal economics.

[avacado]

Revenue increased due to the 2003 tax cuts.

2003 revenue: $1.78 trillion
2006 revenue $2.4 trillion

The AP “forgot” to add in the increased revenue due to the tax cuts.

[haroldeveryman]

“Big Lie” from Wikipedia:

The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so “colossal” that no one would believe that someone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

[woofie]

http://keithhennessey.com/2010/11/18/president-george-w-bushs-spending-record/

The undisputed facts are:

Average federal spending was a smaller share of the economy during the George W. Bush administration than during each of the Clinton, George H.W. Bush, and Reagan administrations.

The same is true for taxes. Average federal taxes were a smaller share of the economy under our 43rd President than under our 40th, 41st, or 42nd.
Of the four, President Clinton’s deficits were smallest, almost entirely because his revenues were highest. President George W. Bush had the second-smallest deficits of the four.

The budget deficit during President Bush’s tenure averaged two percent, below the fifty-year average of three percent.

My conclusions: Relative to the economy, the federal government was smaller during the Bush Administration than under any of its three predecessors, and his deficits were small by historic standards.

[A. Morgan]

‘AP’ a leftist manure spreader.

[griswold3]

Of the many things GW did that I did not agree with, the tax cuts were not one of them. It’s not the governments money.
Got Galt?

Bush Tax Cuts: President George W. Bush’s 2003 tax cuts generated a massive increase in federal tax revenue and were followed by 52 consecutive months of economic growth. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenue increased by $780 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. Total federal revenue from 2003 to 2007:

2003 — $1.78 trillion

2004 — $1.88 trillion

2005 — $2.15 trillion

2006 — $2.40 trillion

2007 — $2.56 trillion

Total federal revenue for 2008 dropped slightly, down to $2.52 trillion, because a recession started that year, but revenue was still substantially higher than it was in 2003 or 2004. During the same period, income tax revenue rose dramatically, going from $925 billion in 2003 to $1.53 trillion in 2007. As with other types of federal revenue, income tax revenue dropped slightly in 2008, down to $1.45 trillion, due to the fact that a recession began that year.

[piytar]

It’s called cognitive dissonance. Even their own graph disproves their point, but facts that counter their world view simply do not register with them...

[LeonardFMason]

When is someone going to take on the leftists at al-AP?