President Obama Has Cut Spending

One of the big Republican lies, repeated endlessly in the conservative media, is that Obama is a huge spender. Romney repeats this lie on a daily basis. But the truth is just the opposite. Let's compare the spending increases under Bush and under Obama.

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-22/co...

"• In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

• In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

• Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO’s latest budget outlook.

Over Obama’s four budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from $3.52 trillion to $3.58 trillion, an annualized increase of just 0.4%."

In fact, the lowest spending increases have been under Clinton and Obama, and the highest have been under Republican administrations.

Here are more facts that refute the republicon lies:

Annualized Growth of Federal Spending:

Reagan '82 -'85 --- 8.7% increase
Reagan '86 -'89 --- 4.9%

Bush I '90 -'93 --- 5.4%

Clinton '94 - 97 --- 3.2%
Clinton '98 - 01 --- 3.9%

Bush II '02 - 05 --- 7.3%
Bush II '06 - 09 --- 8.1%

Obama '10 - 13 --- 1.4%

Fox News, Limbaugh, Romney, and the lock-stepping lemmings who agree with all the lies fed to them daily, need to relax, stop yelling, take a deep breath, and look at the facts.

But, I know, the facts just don't matter when you're a True Believer.

ok. He cut spending. He loves cutting spending. His life is about cutting spending. He is the biggest damn spending cutter ever. Oh God, I think he is cutting spending as I type. Obama the spending cutter, mutter oh futter, banana mana spending cutter. your to damn funny and you wasted all your time doing these stupid ass posts. I sorry, u not stupid, you just sound stupid right now. He hah. dumb little liberal person thing face hog lick dog breathed. i sorry again, NOT.

You say this stupid again, maybe you should see your therapist. You know, the one tax payers pay for.

Ok. You hate Obama. You hate facts. You hate and hate and hate, and have nothing else to offer. No refutation of the facts. Just stupid, manic word games.

I think you should see your therapist, Either the one tax payers pay for, or one that you pay for. But see someone.

ok, calm down little liberal person. i like obama. calm down. deep breaths. Obama will be alright when he goes back to community organizing; plus he was elected president so him and bill Clinton can do gigs together.

You aren't smart enough to bait me but I am to bait you. That is why your type need to stfu and listen

There are many other republicon lies. They repeat these lies endlessly, and those lemmings stuck in the conservative bubble don’t bother to research these assertions for themselves.

That would mean thinking for themselves, comparing viewpoints, and trying to be OBJECTIVE.
For many, that’s just impossible. It’s easier to simply go with the propaganda you’re fed.

If that describes yourself, don’t bother to read any further (if you’ve even got this far). Go beat up on a pillow, or yell into your padded room.

But for the others who may be reading, here are a few more of the republicon’s Big Lies:
1) Revenue is not the problem, just spending.
2) There would be more jobs and a healthy economy if we just lowered taxes more, especially on the rich.
3) President Obama is not an American. He’s a Muslim, etc.
4) Our economy would grow if we just took away restrictions and regulations on Wall Street firms, on Big Oil, and other big corporations.
5) We need to give the Pentagon more money, even if they don’t want it.

That’s just a start. Any others?

your right man. just go lay down and try and catch up on some liberal sleep. Maybe take some of that "blow" obama did or some weed he smoked or drink. come on, stfu. i don't read your stuff, sorry. u need another gig. u r no good at this.

Godfrey wrote:

your right man. just go lay down and try and catch up on some liberal sleep. Maybe take some of that "blow" obama did or some weed he smoked or drink. come on, stfu. i don't read your stuff, sorry. u need another gig. u r no good at this.

Ya god bless America where the ruler can do blow and smoke pot.

Good posting Godfreey, seriously we all are free to watch the late show pree reformer.

Romney likes to give many of his speeches with a background display showing our continually escalating debt figures.

But under Obama, as shown in my posts above, our spending is almost flat. So why is the debt still climbing?

Duh. First of all, because the Bush tax cuts have reduced revenue. Second, large unemployment, including all of the public sector lay-offs, provides us less tax revenue. Third, this downward spiraling economy forces people to buy less products and services, which causes more businesses to cut-back or close shop.

The Romney/Ryan budget would just make things much worse. Even with all of the proposed severe cuts to Medicare,
Social Security, and safety net programs, the Tax Policy Center says that this plan would ADD 10.7 trillion to our debt.

Who benefits from such a plan? Not the 95% of us. The top 5% would get trillions more from the tax cuts.

Screw budgets. We aren't trying to get someone out of office that gives a crap about budgets. We are trying to get a communist a new job. I got it, community organizing.

An excellent presentation of facts. Well done!

In order to completely fix the problems our country faces BOTH parties need to confront the math. There is not a one-sided solution to our challenges. Spending must be cut, our government needs to be leaner and more efficient, AND revenues need to be increased... on EVERYONE. The Bush Tax Cuts need to be phased out, our military spending needs a serious haircut and we desperately need reform to our tax codes and social programs. While we aren't facing impending doom (as our representatives would like us to believe) this path is not sustainable. Most changes can only really happen once the economy fully recovers but SOME steps can (and SHOULD) be taken now.

Tea Party Solution wrote:

Romney likes to give many of his speeches with a background display showing our continually escalating debt figures.
But under Obama, as shown in my posts above, our spending is almost flat. So why is the debt still climbing?
Duh. First of all, because the Bush tax cuts have reduced revenue. Second, large unemployment, including all of the public sector lay-offs, provides us less tax revenue. Third, this downward spiraling economy forces people to buy less products and services, which causes more businesses to cut-back or close shop.
The Romney/Ryan budget would just make things much worse. Even with all of the proposed severe cuts to Medicare,
Social Security, and safety net programs, the Tax Policy Center says that this plan would ADD 10.7 trillion to our debt.
Who benefits from such a plan? Not the 95% of us. The top 5% would get trillions more from the tax cuts.

Senate rejects Obama budget in 99-0 vote
By Erik Wasson and Daniel Strauss - 05/16/12 04:30 PM ET

A budget resolution based on President Obama’s 2013 budget failed to get any votes in the Senate on Wednesday.

In a 99-0 vote, all of the senators present rejected the president’s blueprint.

It’s the second year in a row the Senate has voted down Obama’s budget.

Obama is even out of step with the democratically controlled senate. Face it buddy, nObama is toast.

Your reasoning forgot to mention a few things. Over regulation from the current administration has impacted employment.
The Keystone pipeline comes to mind. The economic pressure on coal fired power plants comes to mind. Eliminating tax incentives for new hires comes to mind. Ever growing intrusion into personal lives comes to mind. The extension and proliferation of homeland security law comes to mind.
Lack of a comprehensive immigration law comes to mind. Bad trade agreements with China comes to mind. Huge national budget deficits come to mind. The debt ceiling comes to mind. The list goes on and on.

Buck up buddy. nObama has been a lousy CEO, and he needs to be let go.

DJ Robert wrote:

An excellent presentation of facts. Well done!
In order to completely fix the problems our country faces BOTH parties need to confront the math. There is not a one-sided solution to our challenges. Spending must be cut, our government needs to be leaner and more efficient, AND revenues need to be increased... on EVERYONE. The Bush Tax Cuts need to be phased out, our military spending needs a serious haircut and we desperately need reform to our tax codes and social programs. While we aren't facing impending doom (as our representatives would like us to believe) this path is not sustainable. Most changes can only really happen once the economy fully recovers but SOME steps can (and SHOULD) be taken now.

u r a stupid jerk. stfu. while your at it stick your facts up your, well, figure that out to jackass. no one cares about the numbers that people like you puke up anymore because we know it is all a bunch of sh_t. Us living this crap everyday don't need anymore wizards of smart telling us things are good or things are bad. We know what things are; so just wait until November and then after the election obama will let out every criminal he knew, that should be fun. Can you put that on a bar chart?

"The big difference between the official deficit and standard accounting: Congress exempts itself from including the cost of promised retirement benefits. Yet companies, states and local governments must include retirement commitments in financial statements, as required by federal law and private boards that set accounting rules.

The deficit was $5 trillion last year under those rules. The official number was $1.3 trillion. Liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and other retirement programs rose by $3.7 trillion in 2011, according to government actuaries, but the amount was not registered on the government's books."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story...

You were deluded once again Tea Party.

"In a column on Tuesday, Rex Nutting of MarketWatch ran some budget numbers and concluded the following:

Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending, an “inferno” of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children’s future. Even Democrats seem to think it’s true. But it didn’t happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.

The shocking, contrarian piece was widely circulated in liberal circles and was even cited on Wednesday by White House spokesman Jay Carney.

But there were a few problems with Nutting’s numbers. Nutting’s methodology assumes spending in the first year of a presidential term should be credited to the previous president. OK, fine. But he attributed a $410 billion spending bill in March of 2009 to George W. Bush even though it was signed by Barack Obama. Nutting also didn’t use inflation adjusted numbers.

But I did both of those and got wildly different results from Nutting, as seen in the chart at the top of this post.(Note: I looked at absolute spending as opposed to the rate of increase.)

My numbers show that spending under the ’10-’13 Obama budgets far outstrips spending by a generation of presidential predecessors. This should not be surprising since spending as a share of GDP under Obama is the highest in U.S. history outside of World War II.

We can disagree about whether all of Obama’s massive spending is a good idea or not. But we can’t factually argue about whether it happened or not. It did.

The Obama spending binge really did happen."

http://blog.american.com/2012/05/the-stunning...

How could anyone in their right mind believe that Bush spent more than Obama when the stimulus alone was almost a trillion dollars? Unbelievable.

The Lefties will go to any extreme to back their guy. Truth be damned.

Sam Lowree wrote:

"The big difference between the official deficit and standard accounting: Congress exempts itself from including the cost of promised retirement benefits. Yet companies, states and local governments must include retirement commitments in financial statements, as required by federal law and private boards that set accounting rules.
The deficit was $5 trillion last year under those rules. The official number was $1.3 trillion. Liabilities for Social Security, Medicare and other retirement programs rose by $3.7 trillion in 2011, according to government actuaries, but the amount was not registered on the government's books."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story...

Oh Sam, don't you check into your assertions first? You WERE right that the official accounting does not include SS and Medicare.

But NEITHER DID BUSH account for these future expenditures. So, that still keeps the comparison between Bush's huge spending increases compared to Obama's much lower increases, a fair comparison.

From a 2006 usatoday article about Bush keeping SS and Medicare OUT of budget calculations (please note that I'm using usatoday, just as you did):

"The Bush administration opposes including Social Security and Medicare in the audited deficit. Its reason: Congress can cancel or cut the retirement programs at any time, so they should not be considered a government liability for accounting purposes."

http://www.truthinaccounting.org/national_rep...

So, it's fair to you to keep SS and Medicare costs out of Bush's CBO statistics, while putting them back into Obama's CBO statistics?

I'm sure that it's fair TO YOU, because anything that makes Obama look bad is just fine, in your non=objective, polemic world.

Local wrote:

<quoted text>
Your reasoning forgot to mention a few things. Over regulation from the current administration has impacted employment.
.
Buck up buddy. nObama has been a lousy CEO, and he needs to be let go.

So, your guy is the empty suited Romney, the guy you all hated, including Gingrich and Santorum, until you gave in to the etcha-sketch guy, the most waffling, placating, substance lacking guy you republicons have ever come up with.

Being the CEO of a vulture capitalist company, which has no interest in jobs, especially in keeping jobs in the U.S., is the absolutely last person we need as a president.

Of course, as says your leader Grover Norquist, he does have enough fingers to sign the bills your lock-stepping T baggers may get through Congress...

Anyone but that Negro Obama, right?

Your sick ideas are from the past. You're trying to bring up all the issues that have been settled for years-- from the Revolution to freedom for the slaves, to voting rights for slaves, to women's rights, to Social Security and Medicare, to freedom from corporate tyranny.

Guess what? We're moving forward, not back to the past.

Tea Party Solution wrote:

<quoted text>

Guess what? We're moving forward, not back to the past.

>
>
SOLUTION,

Doesn't this feel like we are playing Whack a mole...?

You slam MEXITROLL upside down the head and SAM pops ups, you slam SAM and SOCIOPATH pops his head, you clobber him and this LOCAL crawls out of the woodwork like a cockroach, you stomp him ... and so it goes...

GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:

<quoted text>
>
>
SOLUTION,
Doesn't this feel like we are playing Whack a mole...?
You slam MEXITROLL upside down the head and SAM pops ups, you slam SAM and SOCIOPATH pops his head, you clobber him and this LOCAL crawls out of the woodwork like a cockroach, you stomp him ... and so it goes...

So GRANDPA, you're up? Not those dreams again, I hope.

Yeah, it's nuts out there. Absolutely nuts.