| scaeagles |
07-11-2006 06:00 AM |
First of all, Bush does spend like some sort of drunken something. It's horrible. However, his tax policies have led to massive increases in revenue and economic growth. This does not excuse the spending.
All spending bills originate in the House. For this, I blame Republicans as well right now, but it is somewhat shared. EVERY member of congress has their pork they stick in bills to bring home the bacon to the district. I have no idea what the solution is. The line item veto in such cases could be used as a political weapon, and I don't like that.
And I disagree with the whole "surplus" thing of the Clinton years. Those were projected, and done so on some pretty unsafe assumptions -
Quote:
Bush has had few opportunities to boast about the deficit over the course of his time in office. He inherited in 2001 a surplus estimated by both White House and congressional forecasters at $5.6 trillion over the subsequent decade, and it quickly dwindled.
Those faulty estimates assumed the late-1990s revenue boom _ fueled by the stock market and dot.com booms _ would continue. But that bubble burst, and a recession and the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks started a flow of red ink.
|
source |
