• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Obama's Trillion Dollar Deficits in Pictures


    The Washington Post first published this graphic back on March 21st. Since that time the Obama administration’s projected deficit numbers have only become more far-fetched. IHS Global Insight chief U.S. financial economist Brian Bethune told McClatchy: “If they keep playing this game, they’re going to have real credibility problems.”

    And Obama’s insistence that these deficits are all President Bush’s fault is equally uncredible. Heritage fellow Brian Riedl blogs at The Corner:

    President Obama continues to distance himself from this “inherited” budget deficit. But the day he was inaugurated, the 2009 deficit was forecast at $1.2 trillion — meaning $600 billion has already been added during his four-month presidency (an amount that, by itself, would exceed all 2001-07 annual budget deficits). And should the president really be allowed to distance himself from the $1.2 trillion “inherited” portion of the deficit, given that as a senator he supported nearly all policies and bailouts that created it?

    The president also talks of cutting the deficit in half from this bloated level. But even after the recession ends and the troops return home, he’d still run $1 trillion deficits — compared to President Bush’s $162 billion pre-recession deficit. In other words, the structural budget deficit (which excludes the impacts of booms/recessions) would more than quintuple.

    Polls suggest the public tolerates these large deficits because they erroneously believe them to be temporary. Conservatives need to emphasize that the president’s agenda would use a temporary recession to create a permanent restructuring of Washington, with historic tax increases and permanent budget deficits to follow.

    But in order to regain their budget credibility, conservative lawmakers must first take responsibility for the runaway spending that created the Bush deficits. Then they should ask the electorate not to register their anger at $200-$300 billion GOP budget deficits by letting President Obama run $1-$2 trillion deficits.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    10 Responses to Obama's Trillion Dollar Deficits in Pictures

    1. aratunes, texas says:

      Sick Joke and Obama's Not Laughing


    2. John franklin, wisco says:

      It won't be long before we are talking about trillions the way we use to talk about billions.

      Can someone tell me what comes after trillions? Don't tell me it's zillions.

    3. Pingback: » Financial News Update - 05/12/09 NoisyRoom.net: “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the face of tyranny is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater

    4. Grace, Florida says:

      Oh boy – another credibility problem. Wake up America. Stop the madness. Please some good Conservatives step up –

    5. Dad, Atlanta says:

      That's the problem. The ones we consider good can't run do to some serious character flaws: See Newt Gingrich and his ex-wife for details.

      It's sad.

    6. Mike, Wichita Falls says:

      How would this graphic appear if entitlement programs were included (as they should be)? As noted in another section of Heritage…

      "…in 2007, Medicare parts B and D already drew $179 billion from the general fund. By 2017, that figure is expected to reach $353.3 billion."

      I am hesitant to use my credit card even though I pay off the balance every month. The government apparently can bailout out those people who don't or won't, but who will then bailout the government?

    7. Bill, Forney, TX says:

      The newly proposed sugar tax to help fund health care is being promoted under the guise of the Obama administration caring about the health of Americans and how "unhealthy" behavior will make their otherwise "noble" pursuit of universal health care too expensive for the others(read – "It's YOUR fault, you sugar sucking fat slobs!). Most reasonable people see through this and understand that it is merely the best idea they have to tap a new revenue stream to support more government spending (health care or otherwise).

      Once we understand that the real purpose is to counterbalance the ever-expanding federal deficit we can arrive at better solutions to getting spending under control (using the same "cause & effect" analogy). My proposal is a sliding income tax scale on all Congressional legislators and their staffs. The more days they are in session, the higher their tax rate (on their entire income, not just Congressional salaries). The same deliberation rules would be in effect. After all, doesn't everyone need to have a "little skin in the game"? If they chose not to meet at all, the deficit would be hard-pressed to increase (and they would be better able to identify with the 50% of their constituents who pay no income tax).

    8. Lynn B. DeSpain says:

      I am afraid that in answer to the question of, "What comes after Trillions?" It is like the Game of Monopoly. Sooner or later someone wins, then the Board gets shaken up and we all get to start over.


    9. Jack Keller, Pleasan says:

      The order is million (10^6), billion (10^9), trillion (10^12), quadrillion (10^15), quintillion (10^18), sextillion (10^21), septillion (10^24), octillion (10^27), nonillion 10^30), decillion (10^33), and it goes on and on and on. A googol is 10^100 and a googolplex is 10^googol.

    10. Patricia Bliesner, S says:

      Inherited Deficit? — More like Obama caught that ball and is running with it! Check out the Obama-spend-O'meter at: http://www.gop.com/obamaspendometer.htm

      Having Biden make a lame public stament, "Oh, the economy–that? Oh yeah, we ahh misread it!" Whilist Obama continues to propose spending on revamping health care, billions for two-year colleges! NOW the spin doctors have Obama openly address unemployement, OH yeah, that? Ahh

      unemployment will continue to go upwards, but let's not look at that, let's look at MY children globetrotting in Obama-camp, aren't they cute?

      Inherited deficit? nope! and "working" Americans get $13 per week to prove it! (Never mind the gas prices ciphoning that off)!

      The Obama Administraion needs to CUT SPENDING, and don't let me hear Bush took the scissors!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.