When 140 Characters Isn't Enough
More than anything else, the juvenile, irresponsible, and wholly unnecessary fight over the Obama's Sequester highlights the uncomfortable reality that only half of this country's political system is within spitting distance of reality. Over the course of the last thirty or so years the Democrat party has transitioned from the party for the
"Working Poor" to the party of irrational fantasy-based politics: NBC, ABC, CNN, and ABC News, racist Tea Party conspiracy theories, and delusions of a socialist utopia are, sadly, only the tip of the iceberg and what started out as a novel way to motivate the leftist party base has metastasized into a full-blown industrial strength dose of crazy now aimed squarely at the US Dollar itself. Spending isnt a "Spending problem," its now twisted into "we have a pay for it problem," i.e must raise taxes until Democrats say "Stop."
Sen.Tom Harkin (D) said, as coherently as he could muster, on 2/14/2013;
"First of all, I want to disagree with those who say we have a spending problem. Everyone keeps saying we have a spending problem. And when they talk about that, it’s like there’s an assumption that somehow we as a nation are broke. We can’t afford these things any longer. We’re too broke to invest in education and housing and things like that. Well look at it this way, we’re the richest nation in the history of the world. We are now the richest nation in the world. We have the highest per capita income of any major nation. That kind of begs the question, doesn’t it? If we’re so rich, why are we so broke? Is it a spending problem? No.”
Ah, but back on March 3, 2004 a CATO Institute Briefing Paper by Veronique de Rugy wrote in her Executive Summary, about the "The Republicans Spending Explosion" http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-087es.html
"When the Republicans gained control of Congress in 1994, they promised to eliminate the deficit and reduce wasteful spending. For several years, the GOP partly upheld its commitment by modestly curtailing spending growth and balancing the budget. Unfortunately, the balanced budgets of the late 1990s created an "easy money" mindset in Congress, which began a spending spree that continues unabated today. Total federal outlays will rise 29 percent between fiscal years 2001 and 2005 according to the president's fiscal year 2005 budget released in February. Real discretionary spending increases in fiscal years 2002, 2003, and 2004 are three of the five biggest annual increases in the last 40 years. Large spending increases have been the principal cause of the government's return to massive budget deficits. Although defense spending has increased in response to the war on terrorism, President Bush has made little attempt to restrain nondefense spending to offset the higher Pentagon budget. Nondefense discretionary outlays will increase about 36 percent during President Bush's first term in office. Congress has failed to contain the administration's overspending and has added new spending of its own. Republicans have clearly forfeited any claim of being the fiscally responsible party in Washington. Looking ahead, Republicans need to rediscover the reforming spirit that they brought to Washington after the landmark 1994 congressional elections. Fiscally conservative Democrats should challenge big-spending Republicans and work to cut unneeded programs from both the defense and nondefense parts of the budget. In command of the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives, Republicans are primarily responsible for the current budget mess, and it is Republicans who have the power to pare back spending to get the federal budget under control once again."
But Now in 2013 the Deficit is $1.2 Trillion and has been for 4 years, coming up on its 5th year, and as usual there isnt a "Executive Summary" labeled "The Democrat Spending Exlosion." But there was a discussion about "Entitlement Spending Explosion: Implications for the Federal Budget, Taxpayers, and Young Americans" on June 6, 2003, while Bush was in office and the only time when Entitlement spending is an issue.http://www.cato.org/events/entitlement-spending-explosion-implicati...
When the Deficit was $413 Billion in 2004 the Media and Democrats were apparently concerned about "Spending." On 10/15/2004 written in USA Today ( http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-10-14-deficit_x... ) their article explains how concerned Democrats were with the spending problems under the Bush Administration. They reported;
"President Bush has never been straightforward that the deterioration in our
deficit is not short term, but a dramatic long-term deterioration," said Gene
Sperling, an economic adviser to Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John
Kerry of Massachusetts.
Kerry is now in the Obama Administration and very silent on any spending problem.
"The American people deserve ... a president who doesn't try to mislead them about the true fiscal condition ofthe country, and they deserve a president who will put this country back on a course of fiscal responsibility," said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., a senior member of the Senate Budget Committee
They also reported a interesting piece of History most Americans have forgotten, the National Debt at the time. Compared to the almost $17 TRILLION National Debt today almost seems like pennies.
"The Treasury released the deficit figure the same day it announced the government has begun using accounting procedures to avoid hitting the $7.4 trillion statutory national debt limit."-10/14/2004
And according to the Wall Street journal on 10/5/2007 they state, " The Congressional Budget Office estimated U.S. federal budget deficit for fiscal year 2007 was about $161 billion, or 1.2% of gross domestic product. That’s down from the $248 billion shortfall recorded in fiscal 2006, which translated into 1.9% of GDP."
And, at the very end of the Article a statement was made, which at the time was a big deal, that I wish was actually true today.
"CBO has estimated that if the U.S. maintains a military presence in Iraq and if Congress doesn’t allow the tax cuts enacted in President George W. Bush’s first term to expire, then recent improvements in the deficit will be reversed, pushing it up to to roughly $300 billion by 2012." – By John Godfrey
Sadly we all see "Billions" in the rear view mirror with a sigh and a groan for what was compared to the horror of Trillions upon Trillions in the present.
Now Democrats say off the wall things like this;
"They have signaled that their budget will do more to raise revenue than to cut spending and that it will not .... In a memo, Murray adumbrated the justification for this by noting that Congress has already approved $1.8 trillion in spending cuts since 2010 but only $600 billion in new taxes."
"Senate Democrats say they will soon pass their first budget in four years, but it is proving a test."
"“It should not be deficit reduction for deficit reduction’s sake. The goal here should be economic growth and job creation,” Carney said.
"Instead, they want the White House to “rely on economic growth and more fair revenue-raising policies to solve our fiscal problems,” like getting rid of subsidies for big businesses and raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans."
"Unfortunately, according to the National Journal, Senate Budget Committee Chair Sen. Patty Murray’s budget is “expected to offer only broad outlines of many of the (Democratic) party’s usual talking points.” According to the report, Murray’s budget will raise taxes, call for more economic stimulus spending, largely ignore reforms to entitlements, undo automatic spending cuts (i.e. sequestration) and rely on phony savings such as winding down the war in Afghanistan (as if the nation would otherwise be at full strength in Afghanistan for the next decade)."
You get the point. When Democrats are in power the Media ignores the massive spending as they spin their tales until everyone stops listening. When Republicans are in power spending, debt, Entitlements are all issues that must be dealt with.