BHO used the "wealth bubble" to up the budget baseline 2009

[JRK]

So, the author took 2009 and lumped it in with Bush (BLAME BUSH!) and failed to separate out the Omnibus Spending Bill of 2009, TARP, and the Stimulus. No biggie. You see, here's the whole point of Democrat budgeting. This is one of the oldest tricks in their book. They raise the baseline spending by whatever means necessary - emergency spending usually does the trick because a giant increase in a proposed budget generally doesn't garner a lot of votes on the floor. All of the increased spending rate occurs in one event, instead of a series of budgets passed over several years. Once the baseline is raised, that's the new normal, and future budgets (if they're ever actually, you know, passed) work from the previously established precedent of higher spending. Plus that makes it easier to blame the last president for all of your spending malfeasance. At this point in the budget approval process, if someone is sharp enough to pick up on their little trick, they typically come back with something that sounds a lot like, "But, it's for the CHILLLLDRENNNNN!"
Actually, the Obama spending binge really did happen | AEIdeas
his 50% of tarp
the omnibus bill
the failed stimulus

 

[Polk]

The author didn't "[take 2009 and lump it in with Bush". FY 2009 began while Bush was still in office and the bills you're saying shouldn't be included in his tally were either signed in to law by him (TARP), would have passed no matter who was in office (spending omnibus), or were not in his tally in the first place (the author counted stimulus under Obama's first year tally even though it passed during FY 2009). Also, if the sitting president is liable for the FY at time of inauguration, why do AEI's charts start counting the Bush averages from FY 2002?

The reality is that most of the "spending binge" the article talks about would have happened during a McCain administration as well. I don't think anyone seriously believes McCain would have gutted unemployment insurance and other safety net programs in the midst of a recession.

 

[JRK]

The author didn't "[take 2009 and lump it in with Bush". FY 2009 began while Bush was still in office and the bills you're saying shouldn't be included in his tally were either signed in to law by him (TARP), would have passed no matter who was in office (spending omnibus), or were not in his tally in the first place (the author counted stimulus under Obama's first year tally even though it passed during FY 2009). Also, if the sitting president is liable for the FY at time of inauguration, why do AEI's charts start counting the Bush averages from FY 2002?

The reality is that most of the "spending binge" the article talks about would have happened during a McCain administration as well. I don't think anyone seriously believes McCain would have gutted unemployment insurance and other safety net programs in the midst of a recession.

GWB signed tarp into law, thank god
he was not going to use the last 350 billion
Senate vote fails, Obama gets $350B - Jan. 15, 2009
The omnibus bill and the stimulus added another
Obama was responsible for $140 billion in stimulus spending in 2009. Therefore, insinuating that the 2009 deficit was garnered entirely under President Bush’s watch is misleading.

Second, and related, Nutting fails to place blame for a number of other spending items President Obama signed into law on the President, particularly those from the $410 billion H.R. 1105, the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009. This Act, signed into law by President Obama on March 11, 2009, included the following:

Five billion dollars worth of earmarks added by Members of Congress.
A funding increase of $8.5 billion in the Labor-HHS-Education portion of the law, excluding emergency appropriations.
A $31 billion increase in nine bills funding various federal agencies over FY 2008, as totaled by the U.S. Conference of Mayor.

Correcting the media on Obama’s spending record… again « Hot Air