Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Just proof that gridlock is good.
You can't spend what you can't get passed.
|
Nice try....but you completely ignored Clinton's first two budgets (94 and 95) when the Dems controlled both houses of Congress and put in place a deficit reduction plan (an extension of Graham/Rudman Balanced Budget Act that GHW Bush ignored) that forced Clinton to make tough choices to control the runaway debt of the Reagan/GHW Bush years. BTW, one of the first things that GW Bush and the Repub majority did in 2001 was to kill the deficit reduction plan that was in place.
Here is a story on Clinton's 05 budget request, submitted in Feb 04, a year before the first Republican controlled Congress came into office:
Quote:
Clinton Announces Tough Federal Budget for 1995
President Clinton Monday unveiled an austere federal budget for 1995 that calls for elimination of 115 long-established programs, significant reductions in defense and most domestic outlays and only slight increases for the administration's top priorities.
The administration's $1.52 trillion budget is designed to advance the president's agenda within the modest bounds permitted by tough new spending caps, while still meeting the deficit reduction targets included in the economic plan passed by Congress last August....
...The White House estimates that its budget will leave the government with a deficit of $176 billion next year, down from $235 billion this year.
http://www-tech.mit.edu/V114/N4/budget.04w.html
|
As much as you (and seaver, et al) like to perpetuate the myth of big spending Democrats...the facts are clear that the Repubs have been the big spenders. Why is that so hard to accept when the numbers are right in front of you?
Did you notice the $1.52 trillion budget in the story above.
Do you know what Bush's latest budget request was? $3.1 trillion!
It took nearly 200 years before a president proposed a $1.5 trillion budget....it took only an additional 12 years before Bush proposed a budget of twice that size.