Posted on 12/18/2014 5:31:42 AM PST by cotton1706
Can you name the president in the post-World War II era who presided over the largest five-year reduction in the burden of government spending, measured as a share of economic output?
Or how about the president who was in office when nominal federal spending shrank for two consecutive years and had no growth over a five-year period?
Here's another question: Can you also name the president who signed a 10-year tax cut of nearly $4 trillion?
Last but not least, can you name the president who signed the law enabling an automatic 10-year budget cut of more than $1 trillion?
snip
Now let's splash some cold water on GOPers who want to get all excited. Yes, federal spending has dropped from 24.4 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2009 to 20.3 percent of GDP in 2014, but that still means the burden of government spending is higher than it was in 2008 (20.2 percent of GDP) and far higher than it was when Bill Clinton left office (17.6 percent of GDP). Similarly, it's not a huge achievement to freeze spending for five years when the base year of 2009 featured both an explosion of Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) spending as well as lots of "stimulus" outlays.
Moreover, the $4 trillion tax cut was only a tax cut compared to a "baseline" which assumed all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts would expire. What actually happened is that Obama was able to push the top income tax rate back up to where it was before the George W. Bush presidency. And he also increased the double taxation of dividends and capital gains. Finally, the sequester "cuts" also were against a baseline, so the real-world impact is simply to slow the growth of government.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
The best the Democrats can hope for, by contrast, is to block entitlement reforms by retaining the White House and/or retaking the Senate. But since it's virtually impossible for them to get control of the House, there isn't much opportunity to go on offense.
Actually, that last paragraph is wrong. The best that Democrats can hope for is that Republicans, instead of choosing a Reaganite, nominate and elect a president from the Nixon-Bush wing of the party. Many of the biggest expansions in the size and scope of the federal government have taken place with such Republicans in the White House.
But that's a topic for another column.
In view of the total funding of the federal budget for FY2015 save DHS, one cannot make this argument with a straight face.
$18 T in debt and counting. Ya, right.
For every law passed let two be repealed. For every tax instilled, let another tax expire and ten regulations be nullified. Continue until such time as we are once against the freest, most prosperous nation on earth.
For every law passed let two be repealed. For every tax instilled, let another tax expire and ten regulations be nullified.
For every page added to the United States Code, sunset two pages. For every page added to the United States Code, remove four pages. For each topic of law, consolidate all statutes into one harmonious set.
Nonsense. NPR/PBS were funded at the full amount.
Exactly right. This author, besides being a liar, is insanely delusional.
The only way the government spending has been reduced as a % of GDP is if the government is lying and, as they say, cooking the books.
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.