Last week The Hoover Institution’s Peter Robinson posted a chart at The Corner that he said could “only be termed, alas, Republican overspending—that is, the enormous increase in domestic spending during this administration, most of which, of course, took place while the GOP held not only the White House but both chambers of Congress.”
Rising to defend President Bush’s record on spending, The Atlantic’s Ross Douthat responded: “[W]hen Bush took office, discretionary domestic spending accounted for 3.1 percent of GDP, and in 2007 it accounted for … 3.3 percent of GDP. In the years between, it rose as high as 3.6 percent of GDP, which is on the high side by post-Reagan standards.”
But why should conservatives strive only for “post-Reagan standards.” Shouldn’t Reagan’s record at reining in spending be ‘the’ conservative standard? And here, by the way, is a chart on the average annual real growth of non-defense federal outlays in inflation-adjusted 2000 dollars for recent Administrations.
What is embarrassing to me, as a conservative who voted for "W" twice, is that Bill Clinton comes in 2nd. DD
"What is embarrassing to me, as a conservative who voted for “W” twice, is that Bill Clinton comes in 2nd. DD"
What is mistaken about this is that Congress gets to write the budget.
The REAL credit for the 1990s fiscal responsibility goes to Newt Gingrich. In a SINGLE YEAR, they cut the deficit by $100 billion via spending restraint alone. That year was the year after the new Republican majority came in, in 1995.
Clinton/Gingrich was better than Bush41/Foley or Bush/Pelosi or Bush/Hastert. It tells us more about how good the Congress was in the 1994-1998 period under Gingrich and how bad it has been at other times.
What should be embarrassing for Darvin Dowdy, Houston , TX, is not that Bill Clinton came in second lowest in the growth of non-defense spending but that he voted for George W. twice. What could he have been thinking to choose a man so obviously incompetent?
True, Patrick. Doubt if Clinton will ever thank Newt, huh? Also demonstrates a lack of leadership on "W"'s part. Reagan managed to deal w/Tip O'Neil by circumventing and going direct to the people. Plus he picked brilliant people to work under him and he delegated. "W" delegated but he picked the wrong folks for important jobs.
Wonder what would've happened had he used Newt in his administration. Much different outcome, I'd wager. Spilled milk. Water under the bridge. DD