American Elephants

A Deal Must Remove Default Threat Through the Election! by The Elephant's Child
July 24, 2011, 6:13 pm
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Economy, Taxes

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said on Fox News Sunday today that any proposal from Congress needs to “take default off the table for the next 18 months…through the election.”

That makes it pretty clear. The President first cares about his reelection. House Republicans care about cutting the out-of-control spending that is threatening the lives of ordinary American citizens.

The President knows he is in political trouble. The polls are pretty clear. If the election were today he would lose to a Republican— any Republican.  He needs to keep spending to buy the votes of his interest groups. He can’t offer favors without the ability to subsidize, bailout, offer loan guarantees and grants.  He doesn’t know how to create jobs, and he doesn’t believe in the way that Republicans claim that jobs are created.  He’s got to be able to spend lots more money. He must have revenue. And revenue comes from taxing the American people, and if you just tax rich people it won’t harm job creation, will it?

Obama tries to pose as a born-again spending cutter in public, while any details of what he is willing to accept remain secret.  The House Republicans have put forth the detailed Ryan Plan.  They have passed the Cut, Cap and Balance Plan. For all the demonizing and whining by the President and Secretary Geithner they have never offered a plan — any plan.  The budget that the President sent to Congress was defeated 97-0 by the Democrat controlled Senate.  The last verbal offer in the Biden led talks included $136 billion in new spending proposals.

The plans that the Republicans have voted for don’t offer any special goodies for Republicans, just budget balancing for the American people. Republicans don’t even get to do earmarks.

Geithner wasn’t adverse to a little threatening talk of his own.  “I never thought they would take it this close to the edge and let politics get in the way” he said. …”We do not have the ability to protect the American people.  We are doing the responsible thing, but only Congress has the ability to make sure people get their checks on time.

Old Liberal Trick: Scare the Old Folks! Needlessly. by The Elephant's Child

Stanford Law Professor Michael McConnell, the director of the Stanford Constitutional Law Center and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, corrects the President:

In his Friday night press conference, for the second time, President Obama raised the specter that Social Security checks might not go out if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling. His words: “Well, when it comes to all the checks, not just Social Security — veterans, people with disabilities — about 70 million checks are sent out each month — if we default then we’re going to have to make adjustments. And I’m already consulting with Secretary Geithner in terms of what the consequences would be.” Earlier he said in an interview on CBS News: “I cannot guarantee that those [Social Security] checks go out on August 3rd if we haven’t resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it.”

He must not be consulting with his lawyers, because this attempt to scare Social Security recipients is without legal foundation.

…reaching the debt ceiling will not affect the ability of the Social Security Administration to pay its obligations.

The Social Security trust fund holds about $2.4 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds, which its trustees are legally entitled to redeem whenever Social Security is running a current account deficit. Thus, if we reach the debt ceiling (which I continue to think is a remote prospect, even if less remote than it seemed a week ago), this is what will happen. The Social Security trust fund will go to Treasury and cash in some of its securities, using the proceeds to send checks to recipients. Each dollar of debt that is redeemed will lower the outstanding public debt by a dollar. That enables the Treasury to borrow another dollar, without violating the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is not a prohibition on borrowing new money; it is a prohibition on increasing the total level of public indebtedness. If Social Security cashes in some of its bonds, the Treasury can borrow that same amount of money from someone else.

At Dinocrat, the businessman whose website it is quotes a Democrat businessman who echoes the thoughts of Las Vegas mogul Steve Wynn:

There are only two possibilities at this point. Either this clown is a fool who has no idea what he’s doing, which is bad, or he knows exactly what he’s doing, which is far worse. In either case, my business is screwed until at least 2013. I’ll probably wind up laying off another 20% of my people.

The FDA is More Interested in Statistics and Numbers than in Real-Life Evidence. by The Elephant's Child

The Food and Drug Administration has announced that:

The only over-the-counter asthma inhaler sold in the United States will no longer be available after December 31, 2011, as part of an international agreement to stop the use of substances that damage the environment.

Primatene Mist inhalers are being discontinued because they use chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) as a propellant (spray) to move the medicine out of the inhaler so patients can breathe the medicine into their lungs.

CFCs harm the environment by decreasing the earth’s ozone layer. This layer of the atmosphere protects us from some of the sun’s harmful ultraviolet radiation, which can increase the risk of skin cancers and cataracts. The United States and most other countries have signed an international agreement to phase out CFCs and other ozone-depleting substances.

This is absurd. If removing the CFCs from refrigerants and spray cans had no effect on the so-called ozone hole {it’s not a hole, but an annual thinning) the CFCs from asthma  inhalers would be such a microscopic amount that it could not have an effect of any kind. Cheap and readily available is an important quality, as millions of homeowners stocking-up on incandescent lightbulbs are saying.  The “science” on which this decision is based is highly questionable, but that has never stopped a government agency. The humanitarians urging the Food and Drug Administration to withdraw Avastin for women with terminal breast cancer claim that there is no other choice.  The evidence, they say. shows that Avastin doesn’t work.  But the National Comprehensive Cancer Network is a consortium of 21 leading U.S. oncology programs that issues guidelines for practices on the basis of “sound, evaluative clinical information” according to its mission statement.From the Wall Street Journal”

Just last week, the NCCN’s breast cancer panel reaffirmed its position that Avastin is an appropriate therapeutic option” for some patients in combination with chemotherapy. The vote was 24 in favor with one abstention.  No members were opposed.

The NCCN has reviewed Avastin for breast cancer four times since adding it to the compendium in 2005.  Each time they reaffirmed its support.  Their panels include practicing oncologists from some of the most important cancer centers.  They understand the benefits that Avastin can provide to some (but not all) women in controlling their disease. The FDA favors those who rely on statistics and think in terms of controlled trials. Its conflict-of-interest rules are meant to exclude doctors who have experience treating specific cancers in the real world. For the FDA, being an expert physician fatally compromises one’s objectivity in ruling on a drug for breast cancer. Physicians also do not go along with Dr. Pazdur’s known political agenda to increase his agency’s approval power over cancer drugs. This process is the essence of ObamaCare. Big Government relies on statistics, and cold hard numbers, not real life experience with real people. That’s why ObamaCare has an Independent Pay Advisory Board to make decisions about what Medicare will pay for and what it won’t. Big Government people always claim that they are doing things for the poor, for the children, for the elderly, but that is just window dressing. They are uninterested in real-life evidence, and real-live people.

House Speaker John Boehner’s Friday Press Conference. by The Elephant's Child

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) held a news conference at the Capitol today to talk about how the White House’s insistence on raising taxes led to a breakdown in discussions over increasing the debt limit. In a letter to colleagues, Boehner announced he would instead work with congressional leaders of both parties to pursue legislation that avoids default, reflect the will of the American people, and is consistent with the principles of the Cut, Cap, & Balance Act that passed the House with bipartisan support.

Speaker Boehner has written a letter to his Republican colleagues, explaining that the President is simply not serious, and dealing with him is useless. Obama was back again yesterday claiming that 80 percent of Americans want a balanced approach with more taxes and, well, no restraint on his investment. Obama makes up facts on the fly.

Another Democrat talking point is that the House Republicans’ proposal would reduce real GDP growth by 0.5% and 2012 growth by 2%, and cost the economy 700,000 jobs.  Economist John Taylor, looking at actual data rather than Keynesian computer models, said “Some argue that the economy would have been worse off without these stimulus packages, but the results do not support that view.

Kill jobs?  The GOP plan would potentially be a powerful job creator.

Representative Renee Ellmers Takes On Sec Tim Geithner! by The Elephant's Child

Representative Renee Ellmers R-NC questioned Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner at a hearing on the Small Business Committee, on June 23, 2011. Congress should have paid more attention to Mr. Geithner’s failure to pay his taxes. That’s not just a minor oversight.

The Administration is Clueless About How to Create Jobs by The Elephant's Child

— The regulatory process for oil leases is holding back oil exploration and production activity in the Gulf of Mexico. The economic benefits from opening up domestic energy production would spread past the gulf states to the whole country, if producers were allowed to match industry capacity.

This is the most important finding by the House Oversight Committee which released a study “Restarting the Engine” today. The study documents a 250% increase in the deepwater permit backlog, with a near 80% decrease in plan approvals and deepwater drilling.  This means a loss of $9 billion in capital investment in 2011 and a loss to the government of $25 billion in royalties and taxes over the next 3 years.  One unexpected finding was the extent to which an increase in oil and gas activity reverberates through the broader economy. The report indicates that the slowdown is costing 230,000 jobs.

A study issued by the committee in May was scathing about the nation’s energy saying that the President has deliberately created policies which would cause energy prices to rise.

— The mass-market layoff is making a comeback, putting more pressure on an already lousy job market.  In the past week Cisco, Lockheed Martin and Borders announced a combined 23,000 in job cuts.  These announcements followed 41,432 in planned cuts in June, up 11.6% from May and up 5.3% over a year earlier.

Howard Davidowitz, CEO of Davidowitz and Associates said:

Everything in business is confidence.  You lose confidence and businesses can’t deal with that , [and] who could have confidence with what’s going on in Washington?

— President Obama is always hawking some kind of jobs plan — training more engineers, giving business hiring incentives, or creating one more commission. So it’s inevitable that McKinsey and Co., the well-known management consultants would chime in.They asked: What is the single most important step the U.S. should take to create more jobs. They teamed up with the Atlantic to ask a diverse group of economists, executives, social entrepreneurs and others to offer their solutions: [Do note that this group is “diverse”]

  • Teach job creation at our business schools— Richard Florida
  • Connect teenagers to the world of work —Dana Goldstein
  • Paint your roofs white — Bill Clinton
  • Hire people, retire things — Bill Drayton
  • Make permanent the research and experimentation tax credit— Eric Spiegel
  • Give more money to the unemployed— Clive Crook
  • Cut Corporate taxes by a third — Ross DeVol
  • Create an American infrastructure bank— Michael Lipsky
  • It’s time to repeal complex and expensive government legislation— Peter Wallinson
  • Aim for higher inflation —Matthew Yglesias
  • To create more jobs, start with the schools —Michelle Rhee
  • Increase the money in circulation — Carl J. Schramm
  • Overhaul career and technical education— Fredrick Hess
  • Lose the illusion of government job creation—Michael P. Fleischer
  • The challenge of empathy —Jody Lewen

Each of these titles represents a short essay, explaining their idea. At this point, I got discouraged, decided I would never hire McKinsey & Co. for any purpose, and left out the next ten. Didn’t anyone here study economics? Can you find the three probable Republicans or Libertarians?  Of course you can.

Why do they make this so hard? They think that the need is for government to do something, when the need is for the government to just get out of the way. Government cannot fix it, they are the problem. Businessmen keep telling us exactly what to do. •Cut back on regulation, and make sure it stays cut back. •Reduce corporate taxes sharply. •End ObamaCare, it’s going to make medicine less available and more expensive.• Stop spending on enlarging government, •the “green economy” (it doesn’t work), and •reform entitlements, •and don’t raise taxes during a recession.

Half of all U.S. jobs created in June — were created in Wisconsin! “We have made difficult decisions in our state, but they are beginning to pay off” said Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.  Another outstanding record of job creation— Texas governor Rick Perry.

President Obama’s political ideology is clearly more important to him than creating American jobs.

Visualizing the Debt of the United States. by The Elephant's Child

This you need to see!  Here is a visualization of the United States debt from the felicitously named, totaled up in $100 bills.

Obama Has Created an Intolerable Business Climate say America’s CEOs. by The Elephant's Child

— Las Vegas CEO Steve Wynn, a Democrat , has in a boardroom rant, denounced the intolerable business climate created by the White House.

Wynn, a casino magnate, blasted President Obama, declaring him “the greatest wet blanket to business, progress and job creation in my lifetime.”

This blast was remarkable as Wynn has been a staunch supporter of the Obama administration from the beginning.  It has been uncharacteristic for CEOs such as Wynn to express their views in such blunt terms on political matters.

A lot of people don’t want to say that. They’ll say, ‘Oh God, don’t be attacking Obama.’ Well, this is Obama’s deal, and it’s Obama that’s responsible for this fear in America.  The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution, and maybe “we ought to do something to businesses that don’t invest or (are) holding too much money.’ We haven’t heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists.

Business is being hammered. And I’m telling you that the business community in this country is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the president of the United States.

— Last February, 3M’s George Buckley blasted Obama as anti-business.  “We know what his instincts are,” Buckley said.  “We’ve got a real choice between manufacturing in Canada or Mexico —which tends to be more pro-business—and America.”

— Boeing’s Jim McNerney, in the Wall Street Journal last May called Obama’s handpicked National Labor Relations Board’s suit against his company a “fundamental assault on the capitalist principles that have sustained America’s competitiveness since it became the world’s largest economy nearly 140 years ago.”

— Intel’s Paul Otellini, told CNET last August that the U.S. legal environment has become so hostile to business that there is likely to be “an inevitable erosion and shift of wealth, much like we’re seeing today in Europe — this is the bitter truth.”

— Bernie Marcus co-founded Home Depot in 1978 and brought it public in 1981, as the US was suffering from the worst recession and unemployment in 40 years. The company not only redefined home improvement retailing, but thrived while creating thousands of jobs. He said that Home Depot would never have succeeded if it started up today due to onerous regulation.

I can tell you that today the impediments that the government imposes are impossible to deal with. Home Depot would never have succeeded if we’d tried to start it today. Every day you see rules and regulations from a group of Washington bureaucrats who know nothing about running a business. And I mean every day. It’s become stifling.

If you’re a small businessman, the only way to deal with it is to work harder, put in more hours, and let people go. When you consider that something like 70% of the American people work for small businesses, you are talking about a big economic impact …I’m not sure Obama would understand anything that I’d say, because he’s never really worked a day outside the political or legal area. He doesn’t know how to make a payroll, he doesn’t understand the problems businesses face.  I would try to explain that the plight of the businessman is very reactive to Washington. As Washington piles on regulations and mandates, the impact is tremendous.

The Chamber of Commerce has spoken out, as have many more CEOs like Jeffrey Immelt, one of Obama’s biggest supporters, Warren Buffet, and CEOs of media companies, oil companies  and energy suppliers. Bur Obama is not listening.

He wants to keep on doing just what he is doing — spending, regulating — oh wait, he calls it investing, and revenue.  Yes, raising taxes in a recession simply extends the problem, but  investing — everybody knows that’s a good thing, don’t they?

A very large percentage of people in this country complain about American business taking their operations overseas.  Does Obama really not understand why they do that?

The Economy, the White House Says, Is Vastly Improved! by The Elephant's Child

White House Press Conference this morning:

Q— In the New York Times a couple of days ago, there was a report on White House officials entertaining the idea that they can run for reelection without being able to point to a strengthening economy.

Mr. Carney — well, two things remain uncontestably true. The economy is vastly improved from what it was when Barack Obama was sworn into office as President. We were in economic freefall, there were predictions that we were headed to the second Great Depression. We were losing up to —over 700,000 jobs a month. We were contracting at a greater than 6 percent, our economy was. (emphasis added)

Obama promised, when he signed the stimulus, that it would keep the unemployment rate below 8%.

Jobless claims increased by 10,000 to a seasonally adjusted 418,000 in the week ended July 16, the Labor Department said today.

The president has touted his federal worker pay “freeze”, as making adjustments that are necessary  during these difficult fiscal times.  “We froze federal pay for federal workers for two years,” Obama claimed. ” Now that was not real popular, as you might imagine, among federal workers.

Well that one wasn’t true either.  “Step increases” were not affected.  1.1 million federal employees will receive pay increases totaling more than $2.5 billion through the standard “step increases” federal pay system.  And of course the White House staff received hefty pay increases of up to 15%.

The federal government simply does not keep its books the way that a corporation does.  When a corporation gets in trouble, they reduce their work force, shed lines of business, close stores or factories, it is not a “default,” but a restructuring.

A “default” is when a borrower does not make scheduled payments of interest or principal.  When it’s a corporation that defaults, the interest payments they have to make go up, they have a harder time borrowing, and it sometimes leads to insolvency.

If the United States Congress had submitted fiscal year 2010 financial reports like a corporation does— the U.S. would show a negative net worth of $44 trillion, an operating loss of $817 billion, and $1.3 trillion of negative cash flow.

The federal government needs restructuring. The most important policy prescription is for an economy focused on growth. If we could sustain average growth of 5% for the next 10 years, we wouldn’t need a debt-ceiling debate. The average growth for the past 40 years has been 2.83%, but 5% is a splendid goal.

The federal budget records long-term liabilities as entitlements when they are paid in a mysterious “cash basis” budget methodology. Corporations must reflect the net present value of liabilities as they occur. This leads to short-term, distorted thinking. Politicians believe that the country is in better financial shape than it is, and think the country is able to take on more obligations.

Some facts about the federal bureaucracy seep out to the public occasionally. It is fairly well-known that the Agriculture Department has more bureaucrats than America has farms. States are politely turning down federal grants for high-speed rail, as boondoggles that they cannot afford, but Obama will not relinquish his dreams of high-speed rail.

A startling fact is that many departments have as many as 18 levels of management.  That leads to one of my favorite economists and a little ‘Bureaucracy Humor’, probably created by somebody at Homeland Security of HUD.

Do read the whole thing.


Leadership is — Not Proposing a Plan! by The Elephant's Child

Political Punch: Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper:

Jake Tapper: OK. The House is passing something that many observers feel would never pass the Senate and the president has said he wold veto.  The Senate is passing —the McConnell-Reid plan, it’s not clear that that could pass the House.  The Gang of Seven plan, it’s not clear that that could pass the House.  Would this not be an opportune time for a president to lead and say, this—

Jay Carney: Leadership is not proposing a plan for the sake of having it voted up or down, and likely voted down because it is — look, you know how this town works and how Congress works.  If an individual, whether Democrat or Republican leader, steps forward and says, this is my plan and solely my plan, it makes it a lot harder for that plan to be the basis for a bipartisan compromise.  The way to reach a bipartisan compromise is in bipartisan negotiations where a plan emerges that is the product of that negotiation and is supported by Republicans and Democrats and then presented.  Otherwise, your chances of actually achieving something diminish greatly.

So you have Jay Carney, White House press secretary, saying right out loud that “leadership is Not proposing a plan.”

Richard Epstein, the Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law, New York University Law School, and a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago.He knew Obama at the University of Chicago, and in the neighborhood of Hyde Park.

Epstein explained in a video of “Uncommon Knowledge” from the Hoover Institution that President Barack Obama is a “skilled player of intellectual poker.” This is what he meant.  Obama waits until he hears what everyone else is putting on the table and completely shows their hands, before he shows his own cards and pounces.

Obama Wants More Money for His Big Government Ideology! by The Elephant's Child

President Obama said today, in his daily press conference designed to show everyone how much attention he is paying to the important debt battle, now that after 2½ years he has decided to be interested in the country’s fiscal straits.”We’re in the 11th hour and we don’t have a lot of time left.” he said.

So here’s where we stand.  We have a Democratic President and administration that is prepared to sign a tough package that includes both spending cuts, modifications to Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare that would strengthen those systems and allow them to move forward, and would include a revenue component.  We now have a bipartisan group of senators who agree with that balanced approach.  And we’ve got the American people who agree with that balanced approach.

Well, no they don’t.  And 80 percent of the people aren’t anxious to have their taxes raised either, contrary to what the president claims. But the mainstream media will obediently pummel the Republicans for pushing spending cuts and refusing to support tax increases in connection with raising the debt limit.  Republicans had a mandate from the voters in November to do just that.

In negotiations on the debt limit, Obama has said that he will not support any cut in ObamaCare, even though large majorities favor its repeal.  No messing with entitlements, but he’d be glad to cut Medicare some more.  Gotta get rid of those troublesome old folks. And the $53 billion he wants to spend on high-speed rail projects is absolutely off the table. The states into which Obama wants to put his high-speed rail for the most part, don’t want anything to do with it. To call high-speed rail a boondoggle is a compliment.  It’s way worse than that. Wendell Cox explains:

The Federal government is again offering money it does not have to entice a state (Iowa) to spend money that it does not have on something it does not need. The state of Iowa is being asked to provide funds to match federal funding for a so-called “high-speed rail” line from Chicago to Iowa City.  The new rail line would simply duplicate service that is already available. Luxury intercity bus service is provided between Iowa City and Chicago twice daily. The luxury buses are equipped with plugs for laptops and free wireless high-speed internet service.  The buses make the trip faster than the so-called high speed rail line, at 3:50 hours. The trains would take more than an hour longer (5:00 hours. …Only in America does anyone call a train that averages 45 miles per hour “high speed rail.”

The funding is the first step in a faux-high-speed rail plan that envisions new intercity trains  branching out across the Midwest. A similar line from St. Louis to Chicago has increased in cost nearly 10 times from under $400 million to $4 billion. European researchers have found that the average rail project costs 45 percent more than projected and 80 percent cost overruns were not unusual.  Cost overruns were found in 9 out of 10 projects, and ridership falls far short of projections. Three Republican governors have turned down government money and high-speed rail, so far, with more to follow.

Some travelers return from China full of praise for their new high-speed trains. The Chinese won’t ride the bullet train, it’s too expensive. The Beijing-Tianjin line, build at a cost of $46 million per mile is losing more than $100 million per year.

Columnist James Pethokoukis explains Obama’s tax obsession.  “He needs Big Taxes to fund Big Government.” To fund ObamaCare (which is going to require constantly increasing taxes) to fund new social spending and green “investment” we need dramatically higher taxes.

But even Obama’s economists have told him that you don’t raise taxes in a recession. But three liberal think-tanks are calling for unprecedented tax hikes on millionaires, higher taxes on alcohol and tobacco, securities transaction taxes, higher taxes on capital gains, higher taxes on corporations higher death taxes, carbon taxes and gasoline taxes. These, they are really sure, would not hurt economic growth.  They think this is a “sustainable” fiscal path through 2035.  Their plans, collectively, call for Washington to collect an average of 23.6 percent of GDP— compared to the average post-World War II average of 18.5 percent.  The very highest level of tax revenue that the U.S. has ever collected is 20.9 percent in 1944.

New York Times liberal economics columnist  David Leonhardt says:

For taxes to remain where they are, Washington would need to end Medicare as we know it, end Social Security as we know it, severely shrink the military —or do some combination of the above.

How interesting.  Paul Ryan has just proposed a plan that saves Medicare and Social Security, without shrinking the military and puts the economy back on a healthy path— by cutting excessive spending.

Liberals always have good intentions. They want to give people stuff and make people love them. And because they are brilliant caring people they want to be in charge. But they never, never look at the evidence or the history of experiments with good intentions.  And if they chance to see that  it didn’t work, they simply tell themselves that this time it will be different.  And it never is.

The Obama Fiscal Record —Exposed! by The Elephant's Child

The political rhetoric is escalating.  Everyone has been warning for some time of the consequences of a debt default. President Obama, who has said that the public is not paying attention, is associating default with all spending reductions — which he describes as not paying the bills.

Whoa!  This is trying to dazzle with footwork. When you start calling taxes “revenue,” and spending “investments,” then you claim that reducing spending is “failing to pay the bills”— you are deliberately and despicably are trying to misinform the public to garner favor and shift the blame.  The President, unwilling to give up any of his spending, is now calling House Republicans “irresponsible.”

January 20. 2009: President Obama sworn into office.
— In the Inaugural Address “Those of us who manage the public account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because of the vital trust between a people and their government.”
Debt held by public = $6.31 trillion

February 17, 2009: President signs Spending Stimulus into Law.
— Stimulus adds $821 billion  in new spending (CBO)
— The White House promises this infusion of spending and
borrowing would keep unemployment rate below 8%.
That didn’t work.
Debt held by public = $6.48 trillion

February 26, 2009: President issues FY 2010 Budget.
— The President’s budget adds $2.7 trillion in new debt in FY 2010
and adds $1.4 trillion in new taxes.
Debt held by public = $6.58 trillion

March 11, 2009: President signs FY Omnibus Appropriations Act.
— Appropriations Act includes 8,906 earmarks at cost of $11 billion.
— Act adds $19 billion in new spending, an 8.6% spending increase.
Debt held by public = $6.66 trillion

April 29, 2009: Congressional Democrats pass FY 2010 Budget.
— Congressional budget calls for $2 billion increase in 2010 and
another 8.9% increase in non-defense discretionary spending.
— This is last budget from Congressional Democrats
Debt held by public = $6.85 trillion

February 2, 2010: President issues FY 2011 Budget.
— President’s budget more than doubles the debt. FY2011 deficit is
a new record of $1.6 trillion,  spending to new record of $3.8 trillion
and raises taxes by more than $2 trillion by administration estimates.
Debt held by public = $7.85 trillion

March 23, 2010: President signs ObamaCare into Law.
— ObamaCare Law adds $1.4 trillion in new spending over next
decade, and over $2.5 trillion once law is implemented.
Debt held by public = $8.18 trillion

July 21, 2010: President signs Financial Regulatory Overhaul int Law
— Massive new law adds $10.2 billion new spending.
Debt held by public = $8.69 trillion

February 14, 2011: President issues FY 2012 Budget.
— President’s budget calls for doubling the debt in 5 years, tripling
the debt in 10 years. Spends 47 trillion over next decade + $1 trillion
in new taxes. Fails to address drivers of debt.
Debt held by public = $9.45 trillion

April 15, 2011: House passes FY 2012 Budget Resolution.
— House passed budget cuts $6.2 trillion in government spending
over nest decade, saves Medicare, strengthens social safety net,
spurs economic growth and job creation.
— Senate fails to meet legal requirement to pass a budget by
April 15.
Debt held by public = $9.68 trillion

May 25, 2011: Senate unanimously rejects President’s FY 2012 Budget
Vote is 97-0.
— S&P Issues Credit Warning on U.. Debt, April 18. Medicare and
Social Security Trustees issue warning of Looming Insolvency.
— Still no budget from Senate Democrats.
Debt held by public = $9.72 trillion

July 8, 2011: Unemployment hits 9.2%, 800 days since
Senate Democrats passed a budget.
Debt held by public = $9.75 trillion

July 15, 2011; President holds Press Conference: “We’re running
out of time” to deal with debt.
— President tells press “I’ve got reams of paper and printouts and
spreadsheets on my desk, as so we know how we can create a
package that solves the deficits and debt or a significant period
of time, but in order to do it we got to get started now.”
— American people have seen no paper, no printouts and no
spreadsheets, no plan to reduce deficit.
Debt held by public = $9,75 trillion

This brief history of  President Obama’s fiscal record comes from the United States House of Representatives Budget Committee.  $975 trillion – $6.31 trillion = $3.44 trillion, Obama’s record.  He’s campaigning while the country declines.

%d bloggers like this: