Monday, April 03, 2006

Republicans spend like a flower girl on speed.

According to USA Today since 2001 the growth in federal spending has increased more dramatically than during any other administration since Franklin Roosevelt:
The federal government is currently spending 20.8 cents of every $1 the economy generates, up from 18.5 cents in 2001, White House budget documents show.
The problem, according to a fiscal conservative ex Republican Congress member seems to be that there is no check to spending from either the Congress or the President because they do not check each other:
"You take anything, and we've grown it big," says Rep. Jeff Flake R-Ariz., a leading critic of the spending spurt. "When you're in control of the presidency and both houses of Congress, there's just no stop on it. There's no brake."
I would like to point out that the federal budget of 1993 was signed by President Clinton after passage by Congress on a straight forward party line vote. Not one single Republican voted for that budget and most who commented on it made absolutely laughable predictions of economic ruin and despair. This budget directly led to dramatic reductions in the deficit, economic prosperity and is proof that excessive partisanship is not necessary to fiscal sanity. Indeed that one budget vote and the following rule of the Republicans shows how absolutely beyond hope the modern day Republican party is at governing responsibly.

The simple fact is that when given the fiscal reins, Democrats acted responsibly while giving Republicans control has led to budgetary disaster. There is no need for a Democrat/Republican check with the parties controlling one or the other branch of government and depending on partisanship to bring sanity. It is simply necessary to restore Democrats to power. Indeed this seems pretty basic when looked at with hindsight.

Finally let us note with appropriate scorn the attempt by the White House to, in part, blame Clinton for this.
"By far the bulk of new funding - 75% of it - has been to restore the hollowed-out military the president inherited, strengthen homeland defenses after 9/11, and fight the war on terror," says Scott Milburn, spokesman for the Office of Management and Budget. "These are essential investments that were required ... to protect our nation."
Hollowed out military? It was Clinton's military that Bush used to take down the Taliban and Saddam. After presiding over eight years of peace and prosperity and leaving office with nearly twice the popularity as the sitting President currently enjoys, it has become Republican dogma to reflexively blame Clinton. Pavlov's dog could not have been better trained.

Comments: Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]