Obama and the national debt

[CAVEMAN1]

Obama and the National Debt: President Misleads Public on His Role In Exploding the National Debt

Not surprisingly, President Obama is blaming the Bush administration for the debt racked up under his own presidency. Recently, on 60 Minutes, the president was asked to respond to critics who point out that the deficit has gone up $5.2 trillion since he took office. In response, Obama claimed:

“Over the last four years, the deficit has gone up, but 90 percent of that is as a consequence of two wars that weren’t paid for, as a consequence of tax cuts that weren’t paid for, a prescription drug plan that was not paid for, and then the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Now we took some emergency actions, but that accounts for about 10 percent of this increase in the deficit, and we have actually seen the federal government grow at a slower pace than at any time since Dwight Eisenhower, in fact, substantially lower than the federal government grew under either Ronald Reagan or George Bush.”

Fact checkers from the Washington Post, Factcheck.org, and Politifact.com all agreed these claims are simply false. Obama’s assertion is based upon a Congressional Budget Office projection from January of 2001. The CBO had projected $5.6 trillion in surpluses from 2001-2011. As is so often the case, the government agency grossly overestimated revenue and underestimated costs. By 2002, the CBO was projecting a surplus of $313 billion. Instead, there was a deficit of $158 billion, a net change of $471 billion. Considering the 2001 CBO projection was so wildly off just a year later, it is striking how often it is cited by Obama and his allies.

So why was the CBO’s 2001 projection so horrendously misguided? When the CBO put out their budget projection in 2002, they explained, “[I]nvestment plunged beginning late 2000. A sharp drop in profit margins, probably tied to excess capacity stemming from over-optimism ... worsened that fall ... the contraction in the share of GDP claimed by corporate profits is expected to be one of the worst since World War II.” The economy entered a recession in mid-2001; then came September 11, 2001. “Investors, consumers, and businesses lost confidence. As a result, stock prices fell, consumers bought less, and firms sharply reduced orders for new equipment. Lower demand in turn led business to reduce their workforces.” Also, “[C]apital gains realizations in calendar year 2001 fell by nearly 20%.” Corporate tax receipts fell from 2.1% of GDP in 2000 to 1.7% in 2001, and were projected to fall to 1.5% by 2002.

The CBO also grossly underestimated outlays in their 2001 projection. As a result of the recession and September 11, spending increased significantly. By 2002, the CBO was projecting unemployment compensation to soar 67%, and those on food stamps to increase 19%. Of course, there was also the war in Afghanistan. Authorization for the use of force in Afghanistan was bi-partisan and virtually unanimous.

As we are all too aware, that $5.6 trillion in surpluses never materialized. The increased spending, tax cuts, wars, economic downturn, interest payments, and September 11 all contributed. As indicated above, we have added $5.2 trillion to the national debt since Obama took office. For the president’s claim to be accurate, only $520 billion of that amount would be attributable to his policies.

Obama attributes all of the war spending to Bush. Since taking office, President Obama has actually increased spending on the war in Afghanistan, sending more troops to the country.Spending in Afghanistan went from $38 billion in 2009 to $87 billion in 2010 and $98 billion in 2011. Obama requested $115 billion for both wars in 2012. “The cost from 2010 to 2012 is more than $400 billion, excluding interest.”

Obama extended the Bush tax cuts for everyone in January of 2011, and cut payroll taxes, reducing projected revenues by nearly $800 billion. He also proposes to continue the Bush/Obama tax cuts for everyone making less than $250,000 in 2013. The Recovery Act cost $800 billion through 2011, and his health care reform actually increased funding for Medicare Part D, closing the “doughnut hole.”

In these measures alone, Obama’s policies account for more than $2 trillion in deficit spending. Meanwhile, the Bush tax cuts reduced expected revenues by an estimated $369 billion from 2009 to 2010. Medicare Part D cost $150 billion from 2009 to 2011. Secondary to the recession, “economic and technical changes” accounted for $1.96 trillion in reduced revenue from 2009 to 2011.

As such, Bush's policies amounted to a total of $519 billion (reduced tax revenue + Medicare Part D) in added deficit spending, together with some portion of the Iraq war spending, which was essentially wound down by the time Obama took office.

In his claim, Obama had the 10% part right. However, that 10% was more properly attributed to his predecessor’s role in creating the deficits from 2009-2012. The remainder is attributable to Obama’s policies (~40%), the recession (~40%), and other (~10%).

Similarly, the president’s claim that federal government grew at a slower pace than at any time since the Eisenhower administration has been widely debunked. The Washington Post, Associated Press, and Factcheck.org all agreed the statement is patently false.

[County Mike]

Color me shocked.

Obama lied?

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by County Mike

Color me shocked.

Obama lied?

No

The CBO lied to Him

[Bonnie]

I'd be shocked if I found out he told the truth!

Most people's lies come back to bite them, not so with him...he gets re-elected!

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by Bonnie

I'd be shocked if I found out he told the truth!

Most people's lies come back to bite them, not so with him...he gets re-elected!

something I dont understand about the artical...why does Barack Obama say that the Federal Growth is slow...as if thats a bad thing

[flo]

Originally Posted by Tyburn

something I dont understand about the artical...why does Barack Obama say that the Federal Growth is slow...as if thats a bad thing

Because that's what Kenyans believe.



J/K...nobody get in a snit!

[Neezar]

Obama bin Lyin

[Tyburn]

Originally Posted by Neezar

Obama bin Lyin

[Bonnie]

Originally Posted by Neezar

Obama bin Lyin

[CAVEMAN1]

Can anyone help but think that the only reason employment numbers were better in November is because just like every year employers hire holiday help?!?!?!?! But yet, Obama and the media would like to paint that the economy is improving. By January the unemployment numbers will be back up!

By PATRICK REIS | 12/7/12 8:39 AM EST Updated: 12/7/12 10:47 AM EST

New jobs numbers handed President Barack Obama fresh evidence for his strongest argument in fiscal-cliff talks: His prescriptions have been healing the economy.

Slowly, surely, but it’s moving in the right direction, say Democrats, who used the November numbers — 146,000 new jobs and the unemployment rate at a 47-month low of 7.7 percent — to reiterate their call for freezing income tax rates for most Americans while increasing marginal rates for the wealthiest taxpayers.
Continue Reading

“It is critical that we continue the policies that are building an economy that works for the middle class as we dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began in December 2007,” Alan B. Krueger, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said. “Most pressing, President Obama has proposed, and the Senate has passed, an extension of middle class income tax cuts that would prevent the typical middle class family from facing a $2,200 tax increase at the beginning of next year.”

(Also on POLITICO: W.H. to House GOP: We're not moving)

The positive report gives Obama a bit more momentum just a month after he won a second term, and it strengthens his hand in negotiations with House Speaker John Boehner over a new deficit-reduction deal that would supersede the “fiscal cliff” of broad spending cuts and tax increases due to take effect next month.

Like an NFL quarterback who takes all the blame for a loss and all the credit for a win, Obama is now the primary political beneficiary of a slightly brighter economic picture.

Investors reacted positively to the news with the Dow Jones Industrial Average up slightly in morning trading.

Jobs numbers are always a bit of a political Rorschach Test. Democrats and Republicans see what they want in the Labor Department’s data, and Republicans say raising taxes on the wealthy would threaten a fragile economic recovery.

“When a store manager is short staffed because looming tax hikes and uncertainty are stalling her hiring, that’s not right,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said. “When 7.7% is cause for celebration, we know there is more work to be done. We must do better.”

Democrats counter that Republicans are risking just that outcome by holding up tax cuts for the overwhelming majority of Americans to bargain for the top 2 percent. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) called out Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for that and for again using the debt limit as a political leverage point.

“The steps we need to take to keep our economy moving in the right direction are simple. Speaker Boehner should pass the Senate’s middle-class tax cut bill immediately, and Senator McConnell should allow an up-or-down vote on his own proposal to give the president the authority to avoid default by raising the debt ceiling,” Reid said.

McConnell has suggested that Congress give the president the power to raise the debt ceiling, with Congress retaining the right to vote down the increase if it so chooses. But in an odd parlay on the Senate floor this week, McConnell called for a vote on the president’s version of his debt ceiling plan expecting Democrats to object because they did not have the votes to pass the White House proposal.