Oh lookie here, from CATO!
George W. Bush: Biggest Spender Since LBJ
The Congressional Budget Office has released final budget numbers for fiscal year 2009. The numbers allow us to take a last look at the Bush administration’s record on spending from a statistical point of view.
The following three charts show annual average real (or constant dollar) outlays during the tenures of recent presidents. Presidents were in office for either 4 or 8 budget years, except JFK (3 years), LBJ (5 years), Nixon (6 years), and Ford (2 years).
President George W. Bush’s last year was fiscal 2009. Outlays that year were $3.522 trillion, according to the CBO. However, $108 billion was spending for the 2009 economic stimulus package passed under President Obama. Bush was thus roughly responsible for $3.414 trillion of spending in 2009, which includes outlays for the financial bailouts enacted under his watch. (For FY2009, $154 billion for TARP and $91 billion for Fannie and Freddie).
Spending in Bush’s first year (FY2001) was $1.863 trillion, thus he presided over an 83-percent increase in overall federal spending, which includes defense, domestic, entitlements, and interest. Even without TARP and Fannie/Freddie, spending was up a huge 70 percent under Bush over eight years. By contrast, total spending under eight years of President Clinton increased just 32 percent. These are the overall increases in nominal dollars
For more go to this link; George W. Bush: Biggest Spender Since LBJ | Cato @ Liberty
Which brings me to piece written by former Ronald Reagan adviser Bruce Bartell;
Republican Deficit Hypocrisy
The human capacity for self-delusion never ceases to amaze me, so it shouldn't surprise me that so many Republicans seem to genuinely believe that they are the party of fiscal responsibility. Perhaps at one time they were, but those days are long gone.
This fact became blindingly obvious to me six years ago this month when a Republican president and a Republican Congress enacted the Medicare drug benefit, which former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker has called "the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s."
Recall the situation in 2003. The Bush administration was already projecting the largest deficit in American history--$475 billion in fiscal year 2004, according to the July 2003 mid-session budget review. But a big election was coming up that Bush and his party were desperately fearful of losing. So they decided to win it by buying the votes of America's seniors by giving them an expensive new program to pay for their prescription drugs
Recall, too, that Medicare was already broke in every meaningful sense of the term. According to the 2003 Medicare trustees report, spending for Medicare was projected to rise much more rapidly than the payroll tax as the baby boomers retired. Consequently, the rational thing for Congress to do would have been to find ways of cutting its costs. Instead, Republicans voted to vastly increase them--and the federal deficit--by $395 billion between 2004 and 2013.
However, the Bush administration knew this figure was not accurate because Medicare's chief actuary, Richard Foster, had concluded, well before passage, that the more likely cost would be $534 billion. Tom Scully, a Republican political appointee at the Department of Health and Human Services, threatened to fire him if he dared to make that information public before the vote. (See this report by the HHS inspector general and this article by Foster
For more go to Republican Deficit Hypocrisy - Forbes.com
When one reads Bartlett's piece, pay attention to who were the those in Congress then who were pushing the spending, oddly, these are todays fiscal hawks.
Deflect and dodge much?
That does NOTHIN to refute my OP.
OBAMA HAS grew the deficit @ a faster pace and amount that ANY other Prez. EVER.
Dunno why you'd think you'd score points with this.
I along with the majority on the right scolded GWB for suck reckless DOMESTIC spending, alotta that your lefty self should love tho, hypocrite much?
Defense spending should obviously, NOT be counted, as that's an obvious necessity.
Your OP has been refuted my many. You point at the 14 trillion like it's all Obama, but no that's not a fact, it's misleading BS on your part. The 14 trillion is the result of many presidents from both sides of the aisle.
Secondly CATO refutes your little cute OP point, can we say "future deficits passed on to future presidents?" and Bartlett shows that a majority on the right didn't scold Bush, they walked lock-step with GWB all the way, sans a few like DeMint and traditional Republicans (Now known as RINOs) like Bartlett and William F Buckley.
Thirdly, I have never disagreed about the Obama pace regarding spending, never. I have stated repeatedly that he and the Dems spent way too much.
What drives me nuts is people like you who place ALL the blame on Obama, nothing like rewriting history or just making shit up (like the now previous Congress spent more than all previous Congresses). Sorry, but the GOP is as guilty and the Dems, facts bear me out.
And then this; "Defense spending should obviously, NOT be counted, as that's an obvious necessity." Yeah, that's what the USSR thought too and look what that train of thought got them. Can anyone say "collapse"?
Last edited: