Obama: That was then, this is now

Obama has cranked up the printing press and delivered his nominee for the Pulitzer Prize in fiction — his 2013 budget.

It has no more chance of passing than his 2012 budget, which was defeated in the Senate by a vote of 0-97. It calls for a deficit of more than $1.3 trillion, precisely the deficit amount he pledged to cut in half in February 2009 by cutting spending. Now he proposes to spend even more and perhaps reduce the deficit some time in the future by raising taxes on the “rich.”

AP photo

For a president who is getting a bit gray in the temples, it might be called the Grecian Formula.

The Wall Street Journal points out in an editorial, “National debt held by the public — the kind you have to pay back — will hit 74.2% this year and keep rising to 77.4% next year. …

“Economists believe that when debt to GDP reaches 90% or so, the economic damage begins to rise. And this doesn’t include the debt that future taxpayers owe current and future retirees through the IOUs in the Social Security ‘trust fund.'”

You know, the trust fund, the one the Democrats are gutting by $100 billion by extending that wealth generating payroll tax cut amounting to $20 a week on average, but more for those rich people. Don’t worry, those grandchildren Obama is so concerned about will pay tomorrow for our retirees’ checks today.

As for that promise in 2009 to cut the deficit in half, the Review-Journal editorial noted, “Only five years ago, in fiscal 2007, the federal budget totaled $2.73 trillion, and the budget deficit was a paltry $161 billion, just 1.2 percent of GDP. Under the president’s 2013 budget, federal spending will have increased 40 percent in just six years.”

As for the fiction, Michael Tanner at the Cato Institute points out some of the outright falsity in the budget.

The president claims that his budget proposal reduces debt by $4 trillion over the next 10 years, combining $2.4 trillion in spending cuts with $1.6 trillion in tax hikes. Almost none of that is true.

Let’s start with the idea that the president’s budget would reduce the debt,” Tanner writes. “That is true only using Washington math, under which a smaller increase is actually a decrease. In reality, the president’s budget adds $6.7 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years, bringing it to nearly $25.5 trillion by 2022. That would be more than 100 percent of our GDP.”

Tanner says the Obama budget increases federal spending from $3.8 trillion in 2013 to $5.82 trillion in 2022. That’s is not how most people cut spending.

4 comments on “Obama: That was then, this is now

  1. Steve says:

    Funny the left that supported him is leaving him. They claim this proposal is an attempt to regain support from the left again and he knows it does not have any chance of actually making it through Congress. But he can use that to blame conservatives for its failure. A win win for Obama if enough of the left buy into it.

    Sadly the thing the anemic recovery needs is the stability a federal budget can provide. Even a bad one would be better than the stop gaps they have been tossing out here for the last 4 years or so.

    And don’t tell me Democrats couldn’t get a budget through in the first half of Obama’s term, they punched through health care to their detriment. They should have hit hard on the economy and waited until after the midterms to work health care. I maintained then as I do now the Democrats would have kept their strong majority had they waited on health care and focused on the budget and the economy right away in 08.

    Not only that, the health care law would have had a much better chance of being rational had they waited. Because if the Democrats were able to hold power then the opposition would have felt even less empowered and a much clearer less cobbled bill would have emerged. I am in no way saying we would like it. I am saying it would have provided that very necessary stable tax structure investors need to make the riskier moves that grow economies.

    But no, this is all about who gets to stay in DC and who gets sent home.

  2. Absolutely, Steve, it is all about saving jobs … the jobs of Harry and Barry.

    ________________________________

  3. J. says:

    Well said.

  4. […] after promising to cut the deficit in half in 2009, has plopped down a ponderous volume known as his 2o13 budget. If it had a ghost of a chance of passing — his 2012 tome was rejected by the Senate 0-97 — it […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s