Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fed Spending Up 40 Percent Under Bush
newsmax.com ^ | Friday, Nov. 17, 2006 | NewsMax.com Staff

Posted on 11/17/2006 1:50:24 PM PST by Reagan is King

Federal spending in fiscal year 2006 increased by a whopping 9 percent — the largest rise since 1990 — and has risen more than 40 percent since President Bush took office.

The most recent rise far outpaces inflation — the Consumer Price Index is up only 1.3 percent in the past 12 months.

"The greatest scandal in Washington, D.C., is runaway federal spending,” Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., said after the midterm elections.

In recent years, he points out, the GOP majority "voted to expand the federal government’s role in education, [added new] entitlements, and pursued spending policies that created deficits and national debt.”

The Republicans’ defeat in the elections shows that the outgoing GOP Congress’ attempts "to buy our votes” failed, according to Ed Feulner, president of the Heritage Foundation.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; congress; governmentspending; outofcontrolspending; porkaddicts; spendingspree
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last
Not exactly what I had in mind when I voted Republican.
1 posted on 11/17/2006 1:50:24 PM PST by Reagan is King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

Uh, wasn't Reagan a tax-cutter and big deficit spender, too?


2 posted on 11/17/2006 1:52:21 PM PST by snarks_when_bored
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

"The greatest scandal in Washington, D.C., is runaway federal spending,” Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., said after the midterm elections.

That is the 2nd greatest scandal (imo).

The Greatest Scandal is that the House under Speaker Hastert demanded protection for Congressman William Jefferson, dem. La.!

The Speaker insisted the House is Above the Law!


3 posted on 11/17/2006 1:53:12 PM PST by Prost1 (Fair and Unbiased as always!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

I,m surpriesd it's so low.


4 posted on 11/17/2006 1:54:23 PM PST by thegreatbeast (Avenge Curt Weldon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snarks_when_bored

Well, he made an agreement that taxes would be cut and spending cut. However, he cut taxes and Congress kept spending anyway.


5 posted on 11/17/2006 1:54:48 PM PST by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Prost1

IMO Mike Pence not getting the Republican leadership spot in the house is a scandal as well.


6 posted on 11/17/2006 1:54:54 PM PST by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

I voted R as always but I believe this is one BIG reason those on our side sat this one out.


7 posted on 11/17/2006 1:55:15 PM PST by SF Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snarks_when_bored
And he gave amnesty to millions of illegals as well. But facts must not get in the way. Right now, it is time to bash President Bush 24/7 according to some conservatives, liberals should not be the only one who bash the President.
8 posted on 11/17/2006 1:55:35 PM PST by jveritas (Support The Commander in Chief in Times of War)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KoRn

Vote Constitution Party


9 posted on 11/17/2006 1:55:50 PM PST by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

Wonder how much it would be up if you take out the war, and costs directly related to Katrina and 9/11?


10 posted on 11/17/2006 1:55:51 PM PST by bigbob (2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prost1
IMO, a big contributor to the GOP defeat.

The media will always cover for the 'Rats and smear the Pubbies -- we certainly didn't need one of our guys to join the whitewash of 'Rat corruption.

11 posted on 11/17/2006 1:56:09 PM PST by bassmaner (Hey commies: I am a white male, and I am guilty of NOTHING! Sell your 'white guilt' elsewhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King
In recent years, he points out, the GOP majority "voted to expand the federal government’s role in education, [added new] entitlements, and pursued spending policies that created deficits and national debt

Throw the bums out. Oh, wait a minute, we did.

12 posted on 11/17/2006 1:56:22 PM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King
If you think spending was bad under the Bush Republicans, wait til you see the spending records to be set by the Pelosi Democrats.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

13 posted on 11/17/2006 1:56:35 PM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

"Wonder how much it would be up if you take out the war, and costs directly related to Katrina and 9/11?"

Shhhh! You are going to ruin a good Bush-bashing thread.

Also, Florida had a big hurricane year and there was a huge tsunami we pretty much footed the bill for.


14 posted on 11/17/2006 2:00:19 PM PST by L98Fiero (Terrorists, Communists and Liberals. All happy with a Democrat Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Yes, but they will raise taxes commensurate with that outrageous level of spending. They call it 'fiscal responsibility'.

Wait until our kids get the bill for the 'free prescriptions' entitlement. Euthanasia for the elderly will catch on here faster than it has in Europe.


15 posted on 11/17/2006 2:01:10 PM PST by SargeK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

disgrace - an absolute disgrace. no wonder a majority of americans think the gop is the party of big government.


16 posted on 11/17/2006 2:05:03 PM PST by philsfan24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King
Anyone think he will veto spending bills sent by the RATs?

I don't

17 posted on 11/17/2006 2:05:08 PM PST by lormand (Weinerism is a mental disorder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

That's why I and a lot of other Libertarians sat this election out. Blame us if you want but I believe our electors should earn their vote, not just say "I'm not the other guy"


18 posted on 11/17/2006 2:05:33 PM PST by Raymann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snarks_when_bored

Reagan talked the dims into his tax cuts because the country was going under and they were willing to try anything. The cuts worked,the ecomomy rebounded, and tax revenue went through the roof. However the dims didn,t stick to their deal started spending even more. I wonder now why reagan didn't just veto the budget like Clinton did. He supposedly said they could just choke on their red ink which they did in '94. Who would of thought the repubs would choke on their own red ink in '06?


19 posted on 11/17/2006 2:05:46 PM PST by KyHammer (Get over it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: theDentist
Well, he made an agreement that taxes would be cut and spending cut. However, he cut taxes and Congress kept spending anyway.

But that's what the veto is for...something that, unfortunately, doesn't seem to be in President Bush's repertoire, either...

A scary paragraph:

"The fiscal shift in the Reagan years was staggering. In January 1981, when Reagan declared the federal budget to be "out of control," the deficit had reached almost $74 billion, the federal debt $930 billion. Within two years, the deficit was $208 billion. The debt by 1988 totaled $2.6 trillion. In those eight years, the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the largest debtor nation."

20 posted on 11/17/2006 2:06:10 PM PST by snarks_when_bored
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King
There is a war going on.

Anyways, that is no excuse.

Here are the facts.......


21 posted on 11/17/2006 2:06:39 PM PST by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero
Not to mention rebuilding the military. ... complete with war ...

I'd like a breakdown on where the money was spent.

22 posted on 11/17/2006 2:06:52 PM PST by knarf (Islamists kill each other ... News wall-to-wall, 24/7 .. don't touch that dial.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kjo

President Perot thanks you.

Wait...what do you mean, there was no President Perot?


23 posted on 11/17/2006 2:06:53 PM PST by RockinRight (The loss is temporary, hopefully we learn from our mistakes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Prost1
Oh yeah, I'm still pissed about that one.

That is the most animated I have ever seen Hastert.

You and I could never get away with the patrician crap that these clowns get away with.

24 posted on 11/17/2006 2:08:12 PM PST by lormand (Weinerism is a mental disorder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King
That increase is staggering!

I wonder how much of this is attributable to the WOT?

25 posted on 11/17/2006 2:09:37 PM PST by PISANO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King
File under: Why We Lost. If the Democrats had increased spending by 40% in the last 6 years, conservatives (and I dare say most Republicans) would have been outraged. Except for those in Congress, of course...or those who until recently used to be in Congress.

Republicans either need to rediscover their roots, or the roots will discover a new party. That's not a threat - it's a promise.

26 posted on 11/17/2006 2:09:42 PM PST by andy58-in-nh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

40% on what? 1967 Dollars? Same dollars? % of GNP? % of GDP?
The headline/story is irrelevant if there is no fixed value to base it on.


27 posted on 11/17/2006 2:10:10 PM PST by xcamel (Press to Test, Release to Detonate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

My thoughts exactly. It will still be high, because Bush hasn't used his veto. But good grief. People think we can protect ourselves, fight a war on two fronts, pass out money to people living in a bowl and still cut spending? People are so short sighted.


28 posted on 11/17/2006 2:11:56 PM PST by Blogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

What did the World Trade Center disaster and the destruction in NOLA and the Gulf coast add to this increase in spending along with the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq and the cost to rebuild the Army, Navy, Coast Guard and Homeland Security.


29 posted on 11/17/2006 2:12:31 PM PST by hgro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King

How does this compare to the rise in revenues due to improved business climate? This article doesn't give the entire picture IMHO.


30 posted on 11/17/2006 2:12:50 PM PST by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan is King
This is the real story..


31 posted on 11/17/2006 2:14:18 PM PST by xcamel (Press to Test, Release to Detonate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snarks_when_bored
Uh, wasn't Reagan a tax-cutter and big deficit spender, too?

A little history: Reagan was a deficit spender but the largest part of that deficit spending was his build up of our military with the intention of bankrupting the soviets.

That plan worked.

32 posted on 11/17/2006 2:14:31 PM PST by technomage (Protest Voters are ignorant, immature, selfish people who have no capacity for long term thinking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: snarks_when_bored
Uh, wasn't Reagan a tax-cutter and big deficit spender, too?

Reagan had to deal with a big-spending Democratic House of Representatives. Things were supposed to be different when Republicans gained control of government. But things actually were worse. Very disillusioning.

33 posted on 11/17/2006 2:14:38 PM PST by freedomdefender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: philsfan24

"no wonder a majority of americans think the gop is the party of big government."

OK, we need to nip this in the bud for once and for all.

There is no such thing as "small government" It is a falsehood, a fairytale, a myth. When conservatives claim to be the "party of small government", they are claiming to be the party of fairies, elves and other things that don't exist except in people's mninds.

Government serves to perpetuate itself. We have been electing people for 230 years to go and make more and more laws and make government bigger and bigger. It will never get noticably smaller, ever.

Please, let's lose this "small governemnt" bull-crap. It's way, WAY too late. That horse has been out of the barn for over a century.


34 posted on 11/17/2006 2:14:56 PM PST by L98Fiero (Terrorists, Communists and Liberals. All happy with a Democrat Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Cementjungle
It doesn't give any picture, IMHO.
35 posted on 11/17/2006 2:15:05 PM PST by xcamel (Press to Test, Release to Detonate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Raymann

I'm sure every US soldier appreciates your noble sacrafice. They'll probably want to make you an honorary member with Jack Murtha taking control of the military appropriations committee. Even if you would've voted libertarian because you couldn't stomach republicans at least you would be fulfilling your responsibility as a citizen while others are fulfilling theirs.

Cindie


36 posted on 11/17/2006 2:15:50 PM PST by gardencatz (My Marine recruit can beat up your metrosexual Massachusetts senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Blogger

stuff like the transportation bill, with its now-famous bridge to nowhere, did not inspire people to follow your views.


37 posted on 11/17/2006 2:15:55 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Names Ash Housewares

I'd feel a lot better about that graphic and that site if I didn't know for a fact that the Corps of Engineers is under the DOD and they are listed seperately in this graphic.


38 posted on 11/17/2006 2:17:58 PM PST by L98Fiero (Terrorists, Communists and Liberals. All happy with a Democrat Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

"Wonder how much it would be up if you take out the war, and costs directly related to Katrina and 9/11?"

Neal Boortz said spending has gone up under Bush more than any recent president, including Lyndon B. Johnson, even without the war spending.

He's a big spender. The GOP congress was. The new democratic one will be too.

Sometimes I wonder how nice it would be to have less republicans and democrats in congress.


39 posted on 11/17/2006 2:18:34 PM PST by NapkinUser (Tom Tancredo for president of the United States of America in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: technomage

I believe that domestic spending under REagan actually stayed steady or even declined; it was military spending that climbed, and needed to, after the torpor of the incompetent Carter years. Bush has let BOTH domestic and military spending (primarily due to the Iraq adventure which some neoconservatives absurdly claimed would cost nothing, it would be paid for in its entirety by Iraqi oil) zoom.


40 posted on 11/17/2006 2:20:00 PM PST by laconic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: snarks_when_bored

How long will it take people to realize that "Starve The Beast" doesn't work. You can't rely on spending to cut itself by cutting taxes. You *must* cut spending to cut spending. This means you have to sell the public on the importance of cutting spending. I daresay that you should wait on tax cuts until you manage to cut spending. Not only is it more fiscally responsible, but it gives you something to dangle in front of the voters as a reward for their support for responsible fiscal policy.


41 posted on 11/17/2006 2:20:09 PM PST by OldGuard1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

"However, he cut taxes and Congress kept spending anyway."

Apparently, you've never heard about a Presidential veto. That's okay, George Bush hasn't either.


42 posted on 11/17/2006 2:20:22 PM PST by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gardencatz; Raymann

not sure why soldiers would care about raymann's vote, nor is voting mandatory in the US, unlike some places, DPRK and Cuba for example.


43 posted on 11/17/2006 2:20:35 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Raymann
That's why I and a lot of other Libertarians sat this election out. Blame us if you want but I believe our electors should earn their vote, not just say "I'm not the other guy"

Not this one. I recognized a train wreck was coming, and knew to get off the tracks. Did you vote for anyone? Governor? State Attorney General? Judges? Any conservative ballot measures that could have used your vote? Were they all screwed because of Republican spending? I guess I'm really just "small L".

44 posted on 11/17/2006 2:21:04 PM PST by Squeako (ACLU: "Only Christians, Boy Scouts and War Memorials are too vile to defend.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
The headline/story is irrelevant if there is no fixed value to base it on.

Since when did you start expecting responsible and useful reporting from NewsMucks?

45 posted on 11/17/2006 2:21:34 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BW2221

i suspect there was some understanding that congress could get its spending projects passed without complaint if they didn't give him trouble over iraq funding. that certainly appears to have been the outcome, in any event.


46 posted on 11/17/2006 2:21:53 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

Wonder how much it would be up if you take out the war, and costs directly related to Katrina and 9/11?"

Wonder how much it would be up if you took out the "pork Barrel" projects and "earmarks?


47 posted on 11/17/2006 2:22:58 PM PST by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OldGuard1
You can't rely on spending to cut itself by cutting taxes. You *must* cut spending to cut spending. This means you have to sell the public on the importance of cutting spending. I daresay that you should wait on tax cuts until you manage to cut spending.

Yes, you're correct. I wonder whether the idea of cutting taxes first and then (pretending to try) cutting spending isn't analogous to giving Mexican illegals amnesty first and then (pretending to try) stopping millions more Mexicans from entering the country illegally?

48 posted on 11/17/2006 2:24:33 PM PST by snarks_when_bored
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: NapkinUser

I'd say "Ficus for President," but since that was Michael Moore's idea, I'm obligated not to support its candidacy.

Hmm, how about "Carpophilus for President"? Carpophilus beetles both eat ficus species, AND won't spend us into debt on needless social programs.


49 posted on 11/17/2006 2:25:53 PM PST by OldGuard1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: KoRn

"IMO Mike Pence not getting the Republican leadership spot in the house is a scandal as well."

It's complete and total nonsense, indicative of how poorly the party is performing and failing to come to grips with what happened, and a letdown to all of us.

Pence absolutely should have been Minority Leader. There's no questioning that he steps to the table as a principled conservative.


50 posted on 11/17/2006 2:26:37 PM PST by CheyennePress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson