Pressuring the people to pressure the politicians about our national debt

First came the New Year’s tax increases of the “fiscal cliff.” Last week, the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration took effect. Still, Congress will spend much of March negotiating a deal to fund the federal government for the next six months — a deal that, in all likelihood, will mean borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars more.

Lurching from one crisis to the next, however real or contrived each one may be, has not put the country on a more solid, sustainable fiscal path. That’s where Maya MacGuineas comes in.

“We actually know for the most part what the parameters of a fix are,” MacGuineas, head of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, told me during a stop in Atlanta two weeks ago. “You know that you’re going to have to look at all parts of the budget.

“You know that a key challenge here is reforming our entitlement programs, as aging and health care are driving the debt, and that … we can reform entitlement programs in ways that are true to protecting people who depend on them — if we get ahead of it.”

True to CRFB’s bipartisan credentials, MacGuineas doesn’t put all the emphasis on the spending side. She also points to the $1 trillion in annual “tax expenditures,” subsidies hidden in the tax code rather than appropriations bills.

“Nobody looks at them,” she said. “These spending programs, dressed up as tax cuts — many of which are not working, many of which are de-leveling the playing field instead of allowing for a functioning economic system, all of which are draining the Treasury — need to be part of that evaluation too.”

So, how do we get politicians to do something they seemingly don’t want to do? One step is for everyone to acknowledge the immediacy of the problem.

“It really concerns me,” MacGuineas said, to hear “the argument, ‘Look at the [interest] rate environment. Why would we want to focus on the deficit? What we should be doing is borrowing more.’ That’s what people who give you credit-card teaser rates say also, to hook you in.”

Government debt that isn’t repaid on time — i.e., virtually all of it — must be refinanced later, almost certainly at higher interest rates. Just a 1-percentage-point increase in interest rates, MacGuineas said, could mean at least $1.3 trillion more in interest payments over the following decade.

“That’s the amount the super-committee [created by the 2011 debt-ceiling deal] failed to find in savings,” leading to the sequester cuts, she pointed out.

Another way is to point out the glaring flaws of proposals on the table.

“I give Paul Ryan credit for putting out a budget that shows how he would do it with spending cuts only,” MacGuineas said, “but don’t forget that budget includes a bunch of Medicare savings he said he opposed during the [2012 presidential] race.”

President Barack Obama’s budgets have their own problems, she said: “One year, he talked about 12-year budgets compared to other people’s 10-year numbers. The next year he counted war savings [after previously announcing the end of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan], which is really a gimmick.”

MacGuineas said voters “bear a huge responsibility” for continuing to “elect people with a bunch of promises that just are not workable, but they sound good.” That said, she insisted voters “should be able to trust their elected leaders to lead an honest discussion about it. … And that’s not happening.”

She also hopes that if others, such as herself, force that honest discussion upon the country, it will change the political incentives that affect taxing and spending.

“I think what happens in discussions is there are tipping points. And I think if you have enough people talking about this, you have the next ‘Ross Perot moment,’ where it goes from everybody promising fiscal giveaways to, suddenly, we the voters demand they tell us how they’d fix it. And once it gets to that point, then you know that somebody selling you the easy way out isn’t telling the truth, and then it becomes politically more important to have a fix.”

– By Kyle Wingfield

467 comments Add your comment

Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!

March 7th, 2013
6:48 am

Good article, and kudos to Ms. MacGuineas for taking on this most important issue, but left unanswered is…

How do you get the 47% to care about the government running Obozo-sized deficits?

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

March 7th, 2013
6:54 am

The 47 percenters obviously disagree. What possible motivation would they have to be responsible? They rob future generations blind and then blame somebody else for the collapse.

We don’t have a spending problem, we have a parasite problem.

DeborahinAthens

March 7th, 2013
6:58 am

As I read it, the Constitution puts the responsibility of creating a budget,spending, borrowing, etc. on the Congress. Again, as I read it (and it has been perverted so much) the way it should work is this. The House proposes spending, cutting, borrowing. They say what should be done. The proposal would go to the Senate. The Senate adds, subtracts. It goes back to the House. A final (!!!!!????) budget should make its way to the President. The President can veto what he wants. To my knowledge, George W. Bush never vetoed any spending bill put before him. Clinton vetoed many, which flies in the face of the “Republicans spend less” mantra. Our problem, again, just going by the Constitution, is that our House, while filled with blowhard Republicans cannot summon the guts to tell the American people that we must change our entitlement programs. Social Security and Medicare–again, contrary to the Republican rants–are very efficient. The problem is that, when SS was created, the average lifespan was 45. Today it is 72–and growing. If you want to know what a mess our elected “representatives” have created, read “Why our Medical Bills are Killing Us” in the March 4th Time magazine. People like my (not really elected) Congressman, Paul Broun, receive billions of dollars from the healthcare industry–hospitals, doctors, medical implant manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies–to keep our costs for healthcare high. Americans pay more for care than the next top ten countries combined. As the author,Steven Brill, says, we need to stop asking how we are going to pay for this, and, instead start asking our Congressmen and women why the costs of our healthcare is so high. The Flagpole, a local newspaper, printed a list of all our representatives and who had given them money (two or three years ago). Paul Broun had received the most, by far. And the majority of the donors were healthcare companies and doctors. The irony as pointed out in the Time article is that Medicare negotiates the lowest price for services of any other entity. A hospital stay for an uninsured person that runs $400,000 is knocked down to $17,000 for a Medicare recipient. We have spineless, gutless people in charge, and they are owned by the various corporate interests that buy them. They would rather screw us than bite the hands that feed them. Until this is changed, our government will not function.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

March 7th, 2013
7:10 am

To my knowledge, George W. Bush never vetoed any spending bill put before him.

We all know what good your “knowledge” is, debs -

President Bush vetoed a $600 billion spending bill Tuesday, accusing Democratic leaders of wasting money and plotting tax increases, then took his budget fight with Congress on the road.

“The majority was elected on a pledge of fiscal responsibility, but so far, it’s acting like a teenager with a new credit card,” he said in a speech in New Albany, Indiana.

Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!

March 7th, 2013
7:11 am

The House Republicans pass a budget outline every year. The Senate does nothing. The budget process stops before it really gets started.

Heckuva job, Democrats.

Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!

March 7th, 2013
7:15 am

DeborahinAthens: Americans pay more for care than the next top ten countries combined.
—————————-

Laughably false.

http://www.globalhealthfacts.org/data/topic/map.aspx?ind=66

Thomas Heyward Jr

March 7th, 2013
7:15 am

Fiat currencies and centralized Banks ALWAYS fail.
There has NEVER been an exception.
.This system too…………..will fail.
.
But not until every last cent is squeezed out of the middle class and we’re all forced to subsist on cat food tainted with horse meat…or worse.
.
The debt is merely a symtom .
End the Fed.

UIC

March 7th, 2013
7:25 am

Maya MacGuinea knows…“for the most part what the parameters of a fix are.” …..her and a million others know what the “fix” is. There are also 50 million people in this country who were obese in 2003, who are still obese in 2013 (and they are in both the 47% and the 53% referred to above). You think they don’t know how to fix that situation? You don’t think those in the 53% are either currently asking, or will be asking gov’t Medicare to pay for their poor lifestyle choices?
First, knowing the problem and fixing it are different kettles of fish. Second, there are several different fixes, and no one solution is necessarily better than the next.

Jefferson

March 7th, 2013
7:26 am

If you want to get out of debt, you will have to support more revenue, anything less would mean you are fooling yourself .

Jefferson

March 7th, 2013
7:26 am

If you want to get out of debt, you will have to support more revenue, anything less would mean you are fooling yourself .

Jefferson

March 7th, 2013
7:26 am

Say it again.

tomnatlanta

March 7th, 2013
7:29 am

Deborahinathens is a great example of someone who can take a set of basic facts(how our congress is suppose to work) but either deliberately or not- miss state what in fact has happened. When Pelosi was in
charge of the democrats’ controlled house she did not pass a budget. When the republicans gained control of
the house they passed a budget each year but Harry Reid refused to even bring it up for a vote.

Just Saying..

March 7th, 2013
7:37 am

Lil Barry & Fables: So when Mitt apologized about the 47% characterization of nearly half the country, you didn’t believe him?

middle of the road

March 7th, 2013
7:42 am

You know, I have repeatedly blogged about reasonable means of balancing the budget, but I finally got tired of talking to myself. BOTH PARTIES in Washington have any interest in balancing the budget through compromise. One party insists on cutting all social spending and fully funding defense and wars, while the other insists on keeping all social programs and ONLY cutting defense. Neither want to keep both and increase ALL taxes to pay for them. The solution is somewhere in the middle, but no one is willing to compromise, so that is a pipe dream. So it will take a major economic emergency to force any change in the way we budget. Shame on both the Democrats and the Republicans! You are responsible for this mess!

Rafe Hollister

March 7th, 2013
7:52 am

I heard two disturbing “facts” yesterday, 1) at current spending and interest rate levels our grandchildren will be paying 80% more in taxes by 2050. 2) By 2050, without adjustments, the entire federal revenue will only cover soc sec and medicare, and medicaid, there will be no money for anything else.

Yet, people come on here everyday and say “austerity” is the wrong way to go, as we need to spend more money to keep this government based economy on track. There will never been enough money to keep a government based economy in the black. We have to get the private economy out of the ditch. No one is so blind, as those who refuse to see.

Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!

March 7th, 2013
7:53 am

We have more revenue coming in now than we did when the last Republican congress ran a $160 billion surplus. The problem is spending. Fix that first before taking another dime from Americans. Otherwise, you’re not being serious about the problem.

southpaw

March 7th, 2013
8:04 am

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury”
Mis-attributed to Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Tyler, Alexis de Tocqueville, and possibly others; actual author unknown

I fear that the “tipping point” being approached is not the “Ross Perot moment” Ms. MacGuineas described.

HDB

March 7th, 2013
8:05 am

The question I’ve always asked but no one has yet to give a definitive answer: Where was this level of concern about government spending when the nation was BUSHwhacked? During the Obama Administrations, government spending has DECLINED! The sequester was an unnecessary diversion by the GOP………

…..from the CBO (2/5/13):

“If the current laws that govern federal taxes and spending do not change, the budget deficit will shrink this year to $845 billion, or 5.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), its smallest size since 2008. In CBO’s baseline projections, deficits continue to shrink over the next few years, falling to 2.4 percent of GDP by 2015.”

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43907

We DO have to handle long-term spending….but until the economy gets on firmer footing, the government has to be the entity to get the nation through the economic situation it’s in now. You CUT government spending during good economic times…and RAISE government spending during economic downturns. The government, however, must be efficient in how it spends; that is something that NEITHER party wants to address!!

jconservative

March 7th, 2013
8:05 am

I lay both the problem and the solution at the feet of Congress.

Congress controls the money. Under Reagan the national debt tripled, under Bush 43 it doubled and it appears it will double under Obama. The only constant among those three administrations is that Congress approved very dime they spent and authorized every dime of revenue they raised.

Nixon tried to “impound” (not spend) funds Congress said he had to spend and the Federal Court shot him out of the saddle. Clinton was given a “line item veto”, but the Congressional minority sued and the Supreme Court said the line item was unconstitutional.

Bottom line: Congress tells the president how much he can spend and that he must spend it, how much revenue he can have and where it can come from, that he must pay the bills on time, and that he must borrow the difference if the bills are more than the revenue. And then Congress said there is a limit on what you can owe and you can’t exceed that limit.

Am I the only person who thinks this is nonsense?

independent thinker

March 7th, 2013
8:08 am

I have yet to hear a sane argument on why the country should not get back to the tax levels in place when Clinton left office with a balnaced budget and a surplus to pay down the deficit created primarily under prior Republican presidents. This was the height of irresponsibility by our former president who coddled the rich during his entire eight years.To make up for the gaping hole created by twelve years of unbalanced budgets, three unfunded wars, and Medicare drug give away, there must be massive reductions in tax loopholes and corporate tax credits. $400 million dollars in tax credits to Face book on a billion dollars profits makes no sense. Giving anyone a tax refund when no or little taxes are paid makes no sense. (Republicans passed earned income tax credits to buy votes).Of course Kyle and members of the stupid party think it is all the fault of the Kenyan marxist in the white house.

Darwin

March 7th, 2013
8:11 am

YAWN!!! Hard to take the discussion serious when it only surfaces when Republicans are out of power.

HDB

March 7th, 2013
8:12 am

” We have to get the private economy out of the ditch.”

Question: When the private sector is SITTING on trillions and reports record PROFITS…what are they waiting for??

indigo

March 7th, 2013
8:13 am

We can start by getting our defence spending in line with other countries around the world.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp

DeborahinAthens

March 7th, 2013
8:13 am

Aesop, find me another. He actually had the brilliant idea for Medicare Part D, and his puppet Congress brought it up, passed it with nary a qualm–Dems and Repugs. Medicare Part D was the largest entitlement program ever.And it is deeply flawed. It forbids Medicare from negotiating withy the big Pharmas to get the price down. Why do you think that is the case? Follow the money.

James

March 7th, 2013
8:15 am

Buying votes is expensive.

MiltonMan

March 7th, 2013
8:16 am

Libs response: “But hey the stock market is at an all-time high”.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

March 7th, 2013
8:19 am

Welcome to history, debs, as not told by pmsnbc -

May 1, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007. Override attempt failed in House, 222-203 (284 needed). A later version of the bill that excluded certain aspects of the initial legislation that the President disapproved of H.R. 2206, was enacted as Pub.L. 110–28 with the President’s approval.
October 3, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 976, Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (”SCHIP”). Override attempt failed in House, 273-156 (286 votes needed).
November 2, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1495, Water Resources Development Act of 2007. Overridden by House, 361-54 (277 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 79-14 (62 needed), and enacted as Pub.L. 110–114 over President’s veto.
November 13, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3043, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2008. Override attempt failed in House, 277-141 (279 votes needed).
December 12, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3963, Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007.[27] Override attempt failed in House, 260-152 (275 votes needed).
December 28, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1585, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.[28] A later version of the bill that changed a minor provision of which the President disapproved was quickly passed by Congress (H.R. 4986) and was enacted with the President’s approval as Pub.L. 110–181 on 28 January 2008.
March 8, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2082, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.[29][30] Override attempt failed in House, 225-188.
May 21, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2419, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill.[31][32] Overridden by House, 316-108 (283 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 82-13 (64 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-234 over the President’s veto. Due to a clerical error, this act was repealed by Pub.L. 110-246.
18 June 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6124, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill, re-passed by Congress to correct a clerical error in HR 2419.[33] Overridden by House, 317-109 (284 votes required). Overridden by Senate, 80-14 (63 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-246 over the President’s veto.
July 15, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6331, Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act.[34] Overridden by House, 383-41 (283 votes required.) Overridden by Senate, 70-26 (64 votes required). Enacted as Pub.L. 110–275 over the President’s veto.

Bushie had to fight dimmicrat spending like some Herculean Gladiator.

But, of course, it was his fault.

MiltonMan

March 7th, 2013
8:19 am

“Medicare Part D was the largest entitlement program ever.”

Wrong. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security are much larger than part D.

Aquagirl

March 7th, 2013
8:20 am

Aesop, find me another. He actually had the brilliant idea for Medicare Part D

Bush doesn’t count, he appeared out of nowhere and hijacked the puritan sensible-thinking party so they’re not responsible for his spending spree. Or something.

Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories

March 7th, 2013
8:22 am

Milton Man – Yes, the libs learned much during their Occupy Wall Street summer vacation. Now, according to them, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is the sole measure of the nation’s economic health.

southpaw

March 7th, 2013
8:24 am

“During the Obama Administrations, government spending has DECLINED! ”
Only in one year.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals Table 1.1 has this, among other things

Year Outlays
2001 1,862,846
2002 2,010,894
2003 2,159,899
2004 2,292,841
2005 2,471,957
2006 2,655,050
2007 2,728,686
2008 2,982,544
2009 3,517,677
2010 3,456,213
2011 3,603,061

Note that both on-budget outlays and the much-ballyhooed off-budget outlays are in these totals.

DeborahinAthens

March 7th, 2013
8:25 am

Lil Barry Bailout, it is NOT true that we have more revenue coming in now as opposed to when the Repugs went on their credit card spree. Not only were taxes slashed to the bone in 2003–something Dubya the Dumb and the dumbers were hell bent on doing and were warned against– but when the Recession started in 2007, there were millions of people put of work. So you had a triple storm…low tax rates and fewer people paying taxes. The taxes are still low and the unemployment rate is still too low to support our spending. And before you spit out the knee jerk reaction —” the president isn’t creating jobs…” , until companies are forced to start hiring– because they cannot produce their products or services with their existing employees, unemployment will hover in this range.

MiltonMan

March 7th, 2013
8:26 am

“(Republicans passed earned income tax credits to buy votes).”

Wrong again. The 1975 Congress passed this one & guess what, Democrats ruled both houses with none other than Robert “KKK” Byrd in a leadership role. But, hey nice college try on trying to blame the republicans.

independent thinker

March 7th, 2013
8:26 am

I am sure resident spokesperson for the stupid party, Mr. Aesop includes cutting all benefits to disabled veterans and granny when her kids can afford to support her as part of the 47% who are parasites. How about being concerned about GE paying no taxes on over 11 million in profits? How about a $75,000 tax write off for that dancing horse or millions in interest carryover deductions? or $400 million tax deduction for giving stock options to wealthy corporate officers? Probably too complex for the local cons. Easier to blame the Black communist.

arnold

March 7th, 2013
8:27 am

DeborahinAthens, I read the article in Time. It is very disheartening. I just don’t think our congressmen/women have the gumption to change anything. They are too busy trying to get re-elected.

MiltonMan

March 7th, 2013
8:31 am

“Milton Man – Yes, the libs learned much during their Occupy Wall Street summer vacation. Now, according to them, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is the sole measure of the nation’s economic health.”

The memory of a typical lib = life span of the average tsetse fly. I vividly remember libs bragging about the multiple “affordable housing acts” that they championed which bascially let anyone with a pulse “buy” a house. This garbage was the priamry reason for the housing bubble. Same thing happening in the stock market – lib policies (QE, low interest rates, buying up “toxic” mortgages, etc., etc.) are artifically inflating the stock market.

HDB

March 7th, 2013
8:33 am

Aesop’s Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
March 7th, 2013
8:19 am

Seem like what you laud as Bush’s vetoes were particularly aimed at the poor (SCHIP, Katrina, Medicare, Education, and Veterans)…..and the majority of that was in 2007….under a REPUBLICAN CONGRESS!! You can’t blame Democrats for what Republicans did….and as they wish to continue to do: sacrifice the poor so that the wealthy can prosper more………

MiltonMan

March 7th, 2013
8:34 am

“Probably too complex for the local cons.”

Not at all. You must be alluding to the stockpile of “highly educated” democrats being mass produced by the Atlanta Public Schools, DeKalb public schools & Clayton public schools. Ask your beloved Hank Johnson to explain this one to us. His answer will include some reference to Guam tipping over.

southpaw

March 7th, 2013
8:36 am

Deborah in Athens

You and LBB might not be talking about the same time frame. The table I previously cited shows that the last budget surplus was in 2001 (although I can’t find LBB’s $160 billion). Total receipts were just under $2 trillion, as compared to $2.3 trillion in 2011. If the “credit card spree” years include 2006-2008, then your statement is true, although it doesn’t actually contradict LBB’s.

MiltonMan

March 7th, 2013
8:40 am

“…and the majority of that was in 2007….under a REPUBLICAN CONGRESS!!”

Good God the untruths from the libs are unusually rich today. The 110th US Congress (Jan 2007 – Jan 2009) was controlled by Democrats in both chambers (when including the two indies who tended dem in the senate). None other than your beloved Nancy Pelosi was the Speaker of the House. But hey don’t let facts get in the way of your ignorance.

HDB

March 7th, 2013
8:41 am

southpaw
March 7th, 2013
8:24 am

FY 2009 is still the BUSH Budget! If you note the level of spending increases of the Administrations, Obama has spent LESS than Bush did!! The stimulus is counted in FY 2011. The actual level of government spending has DECLINED under Obama……..

stands for decibels

March 7th, 2013
8:41 am

Just a 1-percentage-point increase in interest rates,

hey, here’s a crazy idea.

Why don’t we actually try to implement expansionary policies and see if we ever get anything like a 1-percent-point increase in interest rates before declaring such things “bad” and “not serious” and, you know, worthy of “[p]ressuring the people to pressure the politicians about our national debt”?

I liken this to base runners learning out to take a lead-off. If you never allow yourself to get picked off, how do you even know that you’ve taken enough of one? You don’t.

We are terrified, apparently, of this one-percent interest rate increase, so much so that we continue battering the Poors and the Olds with nutty plans to cut programs designed to make their lives somewhat less horrible.

Maybe it’s just me, but I find that approach disgusting.

/drive-by

Scooter

March 7th, 2013
8:43 am

If more people listened to talk radio they would’ve heard all conservative talk show host criticizing the Republicrats Medicare Part D because it would cost too much. Maybe then they would know conservatives opposed increased debt under Bush too.

JDW

March 7th, 2013
8:45 am

@Kyle…”aging and health care are driving the debt”

Nice talking point…false but nice talking point. Reading that leads one to believe that a primary cause of our $1+ trillion deficit is a direct result of these four programs OASI , DI, HI & SMI which combined comprise Medicare and Social Security. ..it’s not true.

In 2011 these programs combined INCREASED their asset bases by spending LESS than was collected in tax receipts and investment income by $49.8 billion. In short Social Security and Medicare trust funds contributed ZERO to the deficit in 2011. Now you can make the valid argument that over the next 75 years some changes must be made to guarantee that performance but those changes will have ZERO impact on current deficits.

The real problem is this…in 2011 the Federal government collected $968.5 billion in revenue unrelated to these “entitlement” programs yet spent $2.32 trillion. That means that the problem is twofold, first we must increase revenues to fund that portion of government operations including the military and we must decrease spending in those areas.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html

Aquagirl

March 7th, 2013
8:46 am

I vividly remember libs bragging about the multiple “affordable housing acts” that they championed which bascially let anyone with a pulse “buy” a house. This garbage was the priamry reason for the housing bubble.

MiltonMan personally re-writes history and economics all in one post. It must be so incredibly frustrating to know it all and never get your rightful deference from the real world.

Now I understand why cons turn up their noses at “so-called experts.” They’re self-made authorities on any subject and that’s that.

F. Sinkwich

March 7th, 2013
8:47 am

“Question: When the private sector is SITTING on trillions and reports record PROFITS…what are they waiting for??”

Okay, I’ll give it a shot:

Obamacare
Cap & Trade
Higher minimum wage
Dood-Frank financial regs
War on fossil fuels / higher energy costs
Tax increases
Etc.

Have I missed any? Probably…

JKL2

March 7th, 2013
8:48 am

-MacGuineas said voters “bear a huge responsibility” for continuing to “elect people with a bunch of promises that just are not workable, but they sound good.”

The party of handouts and their 47% sheeple say,”What?”.

stands for decibels

March 7th, 2013
8:48 am

one other thing:

The 110th US Congress (Jan 2007 – Jan 2009) was controlled by Democrats in both chambers (when including the two indies who tended dem in the senate).

Yeah, I remember when Nancy Pelosi held that gun to poor GW Bush’s head and forced him to sign all that nasty super-spendy stuff. Dark times!

(And we haven’t even gotten into Barney Frank’s illegal use of The Gaydar.)

/really gone now, for awhile anyways…

Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!

March 7th, 2013
8:49 am

HDB: Where was this level of concern about government spending when the nation was BUSHwhacked? During the Obama Administrations, government spending has DECLINED!
———-

Our President Bush never spent at this level. Neither did He propose or run trillion-dollar Obozodeficits. Try again after getting a better grasp of reality.

JDW

March 7th, 2013
8:50 am

@Southpaw…you do realize that 2009 spending total was Duhbya’s don’t you? Take a look at the difference between 2009 and 2001 to see where the real problem occured.