Weekly Standard: Obama vs. Bush: On Debt

Even given the fact that the 2009 budget was not signed by Obama (actually makes his figures look worse), he has averaged $1.003 trillion more than Bush a year. When is it going to stop?

To put it even into more perspective is this paragraph from the article:

Obama, of course, has said the economy made him do it. But the average inflation-adjusted deficits through Obama's first two fiscal years will be more than ten times higher than the average inflation-adjusted deficit during the Great Depression. Even as a percentage of the gross domestic product, the average deficits in Obama's first two fiscal years will more than three times higher the average deficit during the Great Depression. The fact that Obama's deficits have, by any standard, more than tripled those of the Great Depression, cannot convincingly be blamed on the current recession.

Republicans knew that Obama and the Democrats were spending like drunken sailors but this was a shocker to read. Even now, Obama is purported to say his in State of the Union he wants to cut the budget deficits but at the same time he wants to raise spending. Does this mean more new programs are on the drawing and how is that going to cut the budget? There should be a freeze on all new programs because as we have learned over the years most end up on the trash heap of failed programs.

If Obama wants to really do something that would cut the budget, we have a few suggestions:

1. Admit the stimulus failed and return the excess money to the treasury.

2. Terminate all new Czar positions and their staffs created since January 2009 and return the responsibilies to the various cabinet departments/agencies. Cut the White House staff of all new positions that were created by Obama. Cut the White House staff of the First Lady. Stop the weekly parties funded on the backs of taxpayers including flying in food from Hawaii. (How much as the spending of the White House functions grown since January 2009?)

4. Put the White House on a budget for state dinners so that they are held in the White House and not outdoors in air conditioned tents that costs millions. (The economy is on its back and the Obama's continue to act like royalty with no thought about sticking to a budget for entertaining or flying around the world on a whim) Stop travel on Air Force One unless it is for official business. No more trips to states for 90 minutes and flying back to DC. No separate travel to a destination for the First Lady and children and then the President follows a day or so later. No flying the dog on his own plane separate from the family. Stop unnecessary travel for cabinet members and the Vice President. (How much as the DNC has paid for all of Obama's travel?)

5. Cut the budgets of every department/agency starting with the people hired to oversee the unnecessary regulations released. Any new positions since January 2008 should be vetted and offset by loss of another position if the new position is required. Do an across the board cut to the number of people especially supervisors employed by the each department/agency which has rapidly been growing. Make the cuts by dollar amounts not numbers so a department/agency cannot cut five lower paid people to save a supervisor. Cut unnecessary programs. Put a freeze or cuts on the pay of senior civil service employees as their salaries have skyrocketed passed the private sector.

6. Merge the EPA back into Energy and take away the power they have been using to abuse the states and private business against the wishes of the Congress.

7. Stop the abuse of using regulations by any agency to get around having a bill passed by Congress.

8. Cut the budgets of Congress and along with the number of people on their staff and the committee staffs. Cut Congressional travel except for committee members necessary trips to ensure they are getting the correct information.

9. Reform Social Security so that in 20 years, there is still money to pay retirees.

10. Defense Department could take a giant cut by stopping the mentality of bright, shiny, and new versus upgrading current weapon systems. They have wasted billions/millions on wanting something new like the F-35 or for ATE like in house VDATS by Warner Robins when upgrades to the F-16 and current ATE systems would have saved billions/millions of dollars in taxpayer money.

At the same time, we need to look at the Federal Employees Unions who fund candidates who then become President or members of Congress. Essentially they are spending millions on who they want to be their boss. Are office holders who receive millions from the Federal Employees Unions going to want to do anything to cut the union member's unnecessary jobs? We believe the answer is 'No' and why we continue to get an even more bloated government.

Somehow any mention of the words 'fiscal responsibility' by this President rings hollow after his first two years. Words without action mean nothing. What will we learn from the teleprompter tonight?

Obama vs. Bush: On Debt
7:00 AM, Jan 25, 2011 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON

In his State of the Union address tonight, President Obama will reportedly issue a call for "responsible" efforts to reduce deficits (while simultaneously calling for new federal spending). In light of the President's expected rhetorical nod to fiscal responsibility, it's worth keeping in mind his record on deficits to date. When President Obama took office two years ago, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. It now stands at $14.071 trillion -- a staggering increase of $3.445 trillion in just 735 days (about $5 billion a day).

To put that into perspective, when President George W. Bush took office, our national debt was $5.768 trillion. By the time Bush left office, it had nearly doubled, to $10.626 trillion. So Bush's record on deficit spending was not good at all: During his presidency, the national debt rose by an average of $607 billion a year. How does that compare to Obama? During Obama's presidency to date, the national debt has risen by an average of $1.723 trillion a year -- or by a jaw-dropping $1.116 trillion more, per year, than it rose even under Bush.

In fairness, however, Obama can't rightly be held accountable for the 2009 budget, which he didn't sign (although he did sign a $410 billion pork-laden omnibus spending bill for that year, which is nevertheless tallied in Bush's column). Rather, Obama's record to date should really be based on actual and projected spending in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 (plus the $265 billion portion of the economic "stimulus" package, which he initiated and signed, that was spent in 2009 (Table S-10), while Bush's should be based on 2002-09 (with the exception of that same $265 billion, which was in no way part of the 2009 budgetary process).

How do Bush and Obama compare on closer inspection? Just about like they do on an initial glance. According to the White House's Office of Management and Budget, during his eight fiscal years, Bush ran up a total of $3.283 trillion in deficit spending (p. 22). In his first two fiscal years, Obama will run up a total of $2.826 trillion in deficit spending ($1.294 trillion in 2010, an estimated $1.267 trillion in 2011 (p. 23), and the $265 billion in "stimulus" money that was spent in 2009. Thus, Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending per year, while Obama is running up an average of $1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year -- or $1.003 trillion a year more than Bush.

Excerpt: Read More at Weekly Standard