Skip to comments.The national debt increase under President George W. Bush -- $6.1 ZOT
Posted on 08/30/2012 11:47:00 AM PDT by moonshot925
30 September 2001 = 5,807,463,412,200
30 September 2009 = 11,909,829,003,512
Total Increase = 6,102,365,591,312
Increase in by Fiscal Year
FY 2002 = 420,772,553,397 FY 2003 = 554,995,097,146 FY 2004 = 595,821,633,587 FY 2055 = 553,656,965,393 FY 2006 = 574,264,237,492 FY 2007 = 500,679,473,047 FY 2008 = 1,017,071,524,650 FY 2009 = 1,885,104,106,599
You neglect to indicate that your SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 number of 11 trillion is about 9 months AFTER Obama took office....are you some kind of troll?
Who was in charge of the purse after January of 2007?
Note the last two years, when it really exploded, was when the Rats had taken control of Congress.
Fiscal Year 2009 ran from 1 October 2008 to 30 September 2009.
This was President Bush’s last budget.
He is responsible.
I’d take a good chunk of that last $1.8 billion out since Obama took over and passed more spending bills in early 2009 but even if you do, you are right. Lyndon Baines Bush never tried to get spending under control. While he did several things right, he was a Rockefeller Republican just like his daddy when it came to spending and entitlements. There is no getting around it. And the “Republican” Congress he had until 2007 went along with it. It completely undermined the Republican message and set the stage for disaster and Obama.
Since May 19, 2012
Spending bills originate in congress, look at the big jump in 2008 when the dems took over. The budgets prior, while still far too much, were rather flat in comparison.
True. But in 4 years, Obama has increased the national debt by almost as much as Bush increased it in 8 years. So neither is reducing the debt, but the Dems are increasing it twice as fast.
Duh....Obama has amassed more debt in four years than Bush 43 did in eight. Wanna estimate what BO will ring up in 8 years, should we be cursed with his second term?
Bush isn’t on the ballot.
The Democrats are big socialist spenders. There is no doubt about it.
But Republicans had control of the House and Senate from January 2001 to January 2009.
There is no reason the debt should have skyrocketed under their leadership.
I am just pointing out that the past 3 GOP Presidents have been big spenders.
So nice try Obamabot but no sale.
didn’t the democrats take control in 2006?
Does this figure take Obama’s 2009 stimulus into account?
The Republicans had control of the House and Senate until January 2007. That is what I meant.
Congress makes the budget.
No, they have not. Our current candidate has no plans to be any different. We had a choice during the primary season.
There was no approved budget under Obama as far as I’m aware. They have been operating under CRAs for virtually his entire administrations and HE is responsible for the Trillion Plus deficits each year since then. Add to that the TARP, QEs and all the rest and you have a debt explosion. Add the fact that the Republicans were not in control since 2007.
While Republicans are indeed fiscally irresponsible, the problem is Obama and the Democrats and that’s why I think your post is disingenuous.
Yes I made a typo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.