The War on Spending, Going About as Well as the War on Terror

David Weigel | February 4, 2008

Today, George W. Bush becomes the first president to submit a $3 trillion budget. Actually, the factoid is better than that:

Bush, who was the first president to propose a $2 trillion budget, back in 2002, will leave office as the first president to hit $3 trillion with a spending plan.

I'm with Jim Antle: "Boy, it's a good thing we have Republican presidents keeping federal spending under control." Here's where the money is going.

The sharp jump in the deficits reflects, in part, a proposed economic stimulus plan of around $145 billion. Bush is urging Congress to pass it quickly as a way of getting tax rebates to households this summer in hopes of preventing a full-blown recession.

As in past years, Bush's biggest proposed increases are in national security. Defense spending is projected to rise by about 7 percent, to $515 billion, and homeland security money by almost 11 percent, with a big gain for border security. Details on the budget were obtained through interviews with administration officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity until the budget's release.

The bulk of government programs for which Congress sets annual spending levels would remain essentially frozen at current levels. The president does shower extra money on some favored programs in education and to bolster inspections of imported food, following last year's high-profile recalls of tainted products coming from China.

The cuts come from health care, a Christmas-worthy gift to Democrats running for office next year. John McCain's own spending plans won't actually look much different than this. Yes, he'll pledge to veto budgets until they strip out the pork projects. But any of those savings will be wiped out by the "larger and more capable military" and the missile defense he wants to buy. And he seems completely convinced that voters in 2006 were angrier about the Bridge to Nowhere than they were about Iraq.

Comments

|2.4.08 @ 9:37AM|#

DOA.

Taktix®|2.4.08 @ 9:38AM|#

Bush is urging Congress to pass it quickly as a way of getting tax rebates to households this summer in hopes of preventing a full-blown recession.

Fucking douche!

He can't keep trying to put a band-aid on the economy. That's what caused the mortgage problems: artificially inflating the economy with short term fixes to appear as if things are okey dokey.

Recessions happen sometimes. They're necessary to keep the economy balanced out. This fucking asshole is doing things so that he won't look bad when he leaves, and we're going to have to pick up the tab.

I'm still flagulating for voting for him in 2000...

robc|2.4.08 @ 9:42AM|#

Why do presidents even propose budgets? It isnt their job.

|2.4.08 @ 9:42AM|#

And he seems completely convinced that voters in 2006 were angrier about the Bridge to Nowhere than they were about Iraq.

I suspect for a lot of Republicans, this is true, at least in the sense that those Republicans upset about Iraq weren't necessarily opposed to being there, but wanted a much better job of it.

Episiarch|2.4.08 @ 9:44AM|#

I want to see Frank Caliendo doing a skit of Bush going "trillion--how many zeroes is that?"

Then I can laugh and cry at the same time.

Fluffy|2.4.08 @ 9:46AM|#

I always thought that talking about a "bridge to nowhere" was stupid.

All public road and bridge construction that isn't widening of an existing road is being built "to nowhere". That's why it's being built - to provide access "to nowhere". After the bridge is built, people will go to the other side of it, and then it will be a bridge to somewhere.

Of course, I would oppose the spending anyway. I just thought the characterization of the spending was hypocritical. No one lived on the streets that the bridge critics lived on before the street was built.

|2.4.08 @ 9:46AM|#

Angrier about the "bridge to nowhere" than I am about Iraq (and a questionably functional "missile defense shield")?!

Guess again duh-buba!

What a bunch of maroons running the guvment. Looking forward to the next four or eight more years of Billery McPain.

Michael|2.4.08 @ 10:03AM|#

And things will be much better when Hillary punishes you for not purchasing health insurance -- provided by the government, at government-inflated rates, of course.

Alice Bowie|2.4.08 @ 10:23AM|#

I Hope Congress SITS on this budget until this a-hole is out of office.

We don't need a cut in Medical Services and an increase in Miliary.

We don't need college funds, health care, elderly entitlement CUTS and an INCREASE in border protection.

I'd rather have healthcare/education and a bunch of mexicans than no healthcare/education and no mexicans

Tacos mmm...|2.4.08 @ 10:36AM|#

All public road and bridge construction that isn't widening of an existing road is being built "to nowhere". That's why it's being built - to provide access "to nowhere". After the bridge is built, people will go to the other side of it, and then it will be a bridge to somewhere.

Yes, it will be a bridge to some land owned by politically well-connected Alaskans. No doubt, they will make quite a bit of money when they're property values rise thanks to the bridge that we paid for. Sounds fair.

|2.4.08 @ 10:43AM|#

OMG deficit spending killed the economy!
YOU BASTARDS!
Quick! Print some more money, That'll fix it.

|2.4.08 @ 11:03AM|#

The bridge to nowhere is of course a bridge to somewhere. It's just to somewhere insignificant. If we were for example Japan, we might be able to afford stupid government construction projects like that. Japan's been building silly and unnecessary infrastructure for ever since they don't need to maintain a large military.

But the US maintains a huge military. And so the government needs to skimp on the stupid infrastructure projects. The economy can only handle so much waste and inefficiency before it collapses on itself.

And we have been printing money like crazy. That's how the war on terror is being fought right now. The only problem is that the dollar is worth less now. It's going to become harder to buy stuff with the printing press.

JLE|2.4.08 @ 11:04AM|#

Just when I want to have a bit of hope about this fucked country, I remember we're doomed. Doomed.

Gilbert Martin|2.4.08 @ 11:08AM|#

"The cuts come from health care, a Christmas-worthy gift to Democrats running for office next year."

The cuts SHOULD come from health care - and any and all other so-called "entitlement" programs as well - seeing as how they are all actually unconstitutional in the first place.

They are all a violation of the 10th Amendment.

|2.4.08 @ 11:17AM|#

I'm still flagulating for voting for him in 2000...

Assumig you meant flagellating yourself, me too. Admitting your mistakes ain't any fun.

|2.4.08 @ 11:47AM|#

Who keeps electing these dumbasses? oh, that's right, it's US. I s'pose we are getting the g-mint we deserve.

BakedPenguin|2.4.08 @ 11:47AM|#

J sub D & Taktix™ - that is why I would never vote for Obama, or whatever stooge the R's wind up with (assuming it's not Paul). In 2000, had there been no LP, I would have voted for Bush (as the 'lesser' of two evils). Instead I voted for Browne. Even with the problems that the Browne campaign had, it's a balm to my conscience that I played no part in electing our commander in chimp.

|2.4.08 @ 11:54AM|#

I voted LP in 2004...but that was mostly as a vote against the other two candidates. What would be the problems arising from an electoral system that allowed voters to cast a vote against a candidate?

Rhywun|2.4.08 @ 11:58AM|#

homeland security money by almost 11 percent

I suppose that explains the news I heard about assault-weapon toting goons being added to NYC subways and platforms. I can't wait!

|2.4.08 @ 12:14PM|#

Thank God I voted for Harry Browne in 2000.

|2.4.08 @ 12:53PM|#

"I suppose that explains the news I heard about assault-weapon toting goons being added to NYC subways and platforms"

And this:

A surveillance system will be installed in the Piscataqua River this summer to protect the Port of New Hampshire from terrorist attacks.

The system will include sonar equipment and a remotely operated underwater robotic camera called the Sea Otter that will let authorities check any potential threats to the bridges that connect New Hampshire and Maine. The camera also will let authorities check the hulls of incoming ships.

All Hail the Sea Otter What Keeps Us Safe!

Rhywun|2.4.08 @ 12:57PM|#

sonar equipment and a remotely operated underwater robotic camera

Cool - toys! Sounds like a jobs bill to me.

|2.4.08 @ 2:37PM|#

Congress should show some balls and reduce or cut all of the increases.

|2.4.08 @ 3:44PM|#

spending as % of GDP is still lower than at height of defense buildup in COld war. Still nowhere close to WW2 levels.

how long that'll last with a War to fight and an aging Baby Boomer population and increasing population is anyone's guess

|2.5.08 @ 4:36PM|#

Today, George W. Bush becomes the first president to submit a $3 trillion budget. Actually, the factoid is better than that:

On the whole, this is one of those factoids that obscures, not illuminates, unless the point is to demonstrate something about GDP growth and/or inflation.

CBO Historical Budget Data is here. Outlays as a percentage of GDP was 20.0% in FY 2007. It was also 20.0% in FY 2003. Pretending that it's a massive increase because of inflation and GDP growth is rather silly. It is certainly higher than it was FY 1997-2002, though lower than all other post-1974 and the Watergate Congress years.

B|2.5.08 @ 6:13PM|#

Considering the fact the United States has not suffered a terrorist attack in 6 and a half years,and AQ in Iraq pretty much has ceased to exist, the war on terror seems to be going pretty well despite the snarky comments of the assholes on this bigot-supporting site.