That is a portrait of what governance by ‘fiscal conservatives’ looks like. A lot of the deficit can be explained by the war on terror and the poorer than expected economy, but show me the spending cuts. You can’t. And the fools on the left are chasing mythical lies while this deficit sits here glaring them in the face, and you wonder why I think Democrats are stupid (although it appears that Kevin Drum might be catching on.)
[email protected]
Don’t think we can blame ‘the economic slowdown’. President Bush, from March 2001: ‘Even if the slowdown were to turn into a recession similar to that of 1990 and ’91, the Congressional Budget Office projects that the 10-year surplus would shrink by only 2 percent, from a little more than $5.6 trillion to a little less than $5.5 trillion.’
So he’s entirely responsible for the absolute elimination of the surplus? As a Concord Coalition type Democrat, I definitely concur with your thoughts on this being a larger issue.
Toren
If the Republicans don’t stop spending money like drunken sailors, I’m not voting next time. I won’t vote for the Dems, but I will not vote for the Republicans if they are not going to be the party of small government. I suspect there are many like me, who will stay at home out of disgust.
When will the Repubs learn that they cannot possibly buy as many votes as they would get by slashing government spending?
Fools.
Moe Lane
“…although it appears that Kevin Drum might be catching on.”
If the thread was any indication, it’s not looking good for his readers. Most of ’em seem to be on hair-triggers and easily distractable (rea, if you ever read this, that wasn’t directed at you).
John Cole
Don’t think we can blame ‘the economic slowdown’. President Bush, from March 2001: ‘Even if the slowdown were to turn into a recession similar to that of 1990 and ’91, the Congressional Budget Office projects that the 10-year surplus would shrink by only 2 percent, from a little more than $5.6 trillion to a little less than $5.5 trillion.’
Ten year projections have been right exactly NEVER in the history of the universe. Anyone who takes those seriously is smoking crack.
David Nieporent
Democrats focusing on Bush’s supposed lies wrt Iraq are stupid, yes. But I don’t think that focusing on the deficit is a winning strategy for them, either. They tried that, all throughout the Reagan-Bush41 era. It didn’t work, because NOBODY CARES. The deficit is a punditocracy thing, not a voter thing.
Andrew Lazarus
The deficit can be used as a symbol. Everyone knows that we had a better economy under Clinton, and we also had a surplus. The deficit becomes symbolic of two things: (1) Bush doesn’t manage the economy as well as a Democrat and (2) Bush’s constant reiterations that the surplus would stay, followed by his consistent underestimates of the deficit, coupled with his refusal honestly to account for expenses (the Iraq War is already budgeted at more than double Bush’s original estimate, but like the deficit this figure will continue to increase) suggest that he is either untrustworthy, foolish, or both. The pretense that we won’t cut spending is more of the same, but I’m sure you realize that there isn’t enough non-entitlement spending to cut to fix THIS deficit, and the plan to do unto Social Security what they have done unto the rest of the budget is under wraps until mid-November 2004, for obvious reasons.
I mean, we know Bush doesn’t lie (sneer), but would you REALLY like a Googled history of one discarded deficit estimate after another, growing all the while?
As for Bush-41, it was the refusal of the Senate Republicans (e.g., Bob Dole) to allow the deficits to continue to expand that forced Bush-41 into backtracking on his rather optimistic ‘No new taxes’ pledge.
Norbizness
Sheesh, John, I didn’t make the 10-year quote, I just reprinted it. And, of course, 10-year projections are unreliable; however, it shows that the 2001 Administration expected to stay in the black, even with a recession.
Andrew: I do have a timeline (it’s the only time I’ve ever done research, period) Click on my name for one laughable prediction after another.