Thursday | February 13, 2003
Bush budget explicit cause of deficits
So why do we have budget deficits? Tax cuts? Out-of-control defense spending? Tax-and-spend Democrats? Tax-and-borrow Republicans? 9-11? Weak economy? You can pick and choose your excuses depending on which side of the political spectrum you reside.
But here's a new question: why will the nation suffer ongoing deficits throughout Bush's entire tenure (and perhaps that of his successor in 2004, as well)? For an answer we need to look no further than the OMB's analysis of Bush's proposed budget.
(click on image to enlarge.)
The Office of Management and Budget-prepared baseline shows that the deficit will decline precipitously without the changes in tax and spending policies the White House is proposing. In fact, the baseline shows that the budget will be in surplus starting in 2006 and that the surplus will increase every year thereafter. But S-3 also indicates that implementing the Bush budget would greatly increase the deficits in 2003-2005 and obliterate the projected surpluses in 2006-2008.So Bush's own numbers (the OMB is a White House agency) show that his tax cuts and spending increases tear the budget apart far beyond anything an improving economy can hope to repair. The debt service alone on the new, increased debt will account for over $100 billion over the next five years. All combined, Bush's budget (and remember, these are his optimistic numbers) will add nearly $1 trillion to the nation's debt in five short years.
Now throw in money for war, money for bribes to Turkey (and anyone else that can be bought to support Bush's war), and the fact that the economy still hasn't performed as well as Bush has previously predicted, and what we have is a financial catastrophy of epic proportions.
Clinton declared years ago that the era of big government was over. Bush never got the memo.
(Via Tapped.)Posted February 13, 2003 01:04 PM | Comments (36)