Democrats own the deficit

Byline: | Category: Economy, Taxes & Spending | Posted at: Saturday, 28 February 2009

Ordinarily, from January to September of a new President’s first year, the government lives under the budget of his predecessor.  That isn’t the case this year.  Last fall the Democratic-controlled Congress refused to act on President Bush’s 2009 budget proposal, gambling that by delaying ratification of the budget until the new year, they would also have the Presidency and could write the budget exactly the way they wanted: without any Republican interference. 

It worked out for them like they planned.  However, the 2009 budget may be a case of “be careful what you wish for.”  Barack Obama and the Democrats now own the 2009 budget.  Every bit of it.  They also own all of the (almost certain to be an underestimated) $1.75 trillion budget deficit, an amount four times the largest deficit President Bush ever created.

If the economy turns around (click here to learn why it won’t), all will be forgiven.  However, if the economy tanks, Obama and the Democrats can’t even pretend that it was President Bush’s 2009 budget that made the difference. 


Courtesy of Fred Siesel, here’s a line from a sign at one of the New York Tea Party protest:

The recovery begins when Barack Obama loses his job

It should be a bumper sticker.


Thanks for stopping by from Instapundit.  Take a look around while you’re here:

Can I have my change back

It’s even worse in Peking

If you’re up on Facebook, look me up.


I’m looking for a list of looters to boycott.  This is a perfect time for the people to take business away from those companies taking cash away from the people.

Share this post:

19 Responses to “Democrats own the deficit”

  1. Saturday Afternoon - Watching The Snow Fall - No Laundry Time , An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings Says:

    […] Democrats own the deficit – Bob Krumm […]

  2. Brad Says:

    It’s hard to give the Republicans too much credit considering their lack of control over spending for at least 6 of the last eight years but at least they are starting to become conscious of this mistake. Democrats complained about the deficit under Bush and always mention how Clinton handed off a balanced budget to Bush but I think this speaks more to the benefit of divided government since the Republican congress was largely responsible for the control on spending during the 90s. I think a lot of people were hoping President Obama would govern more from the center in a similar fashion to Clinton but it certainly doesn’t look like there is going to be a declaration that ‘the era of big government is over’ from him.

  3. Instapundit » Blog Archive » BOB KRUMM: Democrats Now Own The Deficit. Last fall the Democratic-controlled Congress refused t… Says:

    […] BOB KRUMM: Democrats Now Own The Deficit. […]

  4. Peg C. Says:

    Economic history should prove to us that you cannot recover with these kinds of truly oppressive and confiscatory fiscal policies in place. Not only are taxes and inflation going to bleed us dry, but workers will cease to participate willingly in the rape and pillage. We’ve stopped spending and will pull back on entrepreneurial efforts. Furthermore, we are now a service economy, not a manufacturing one, which makes it that much more sensitive and precarious.

    There’s a question of whether the Dems intend to destroy this country, re-design it in their own statist, Marxist image, or whether by virtue of their utter inability to understand, much less lead and oversee an economy and American enterprise they simply are victims of the Law of Unintended Consequences. I guess I have faith in both their incompetence and their over-reaching venality, but mostly their neverending grasps for power. I pray this is their total undoing but also that this country can recover.

  5. Rob Says:

    Even now, Pres. Obama is trying to pass off the budget as “old business left over from last year” never mention that he, in a rare moment of action rather than “being present” actually backed earmarks, along with then-Sen. Biden. The Dems will be passing the back to the Bush administration as long as they feel they can get away with it.

  6. red Says:

    –Democrats complained about the deficit under Bush–

    Democrats complained that concrete was hard and the sky was blue under Bush, that Bush was causing Terrorism and global warming. If people really listened to Democrats call for fiscal restraint under Bush, then they would be up in arms about this gusher of spending. Its all posturing, this is the real Democratic ideology. Government telling you how and when to do everything.

  7. BizzyBlog » Lucid Links and Bombastic Blather (030109) Says:

    […] Bob Krumm (HT Instapundit) — “Democrats Own the Deficit.” Well of course. They’ve owned the POR (Pelosi-Obama-Reid) Economy since June. […]

  8. Ben Says:

    This is irrelevant. The owners of the deficit will be whoever the mass media claims they are. If things work out, it will be Obama’s victory, and when they don’t the left will pin the blame on Bush regardless of the budget and they’ll get away with it.

  9. ron Says:

    “However, if the economy tanks, Obama and the Democrats can’t even pretend that it was President Bush’s 2009 budget that made the difference.”
    Not only will they pretend that it was Bush’s budget, the media will report it that way.

    There is no lie the democrats will not tell.

  10. Mwalimu Daudi Says:

    “If the economy turns around …… all will be forgiven. However, if the economy tanks, Obama and the Democrats can’t even pretend that it was President Bush’s 2009 budget that made the difference.”

    You underestimate the eagerness of RINOs like Snowe, Collins, Specter, etc. to bail out their Democrat pals.

  11. Easycure Says:

    Maybe the title should be “Democrats Have Bought The Deficit.”

    The center of the Democratic Party has moved decided left. Obama bought the election with centrist rhetoric, and the chicken is going home to roost.

    Anyone who voted for him should have known this all along. Republicans were warning of this during the whole campaign. None of it is a surprise.

    Personally, instead of all the feely good wishes that Obama succeeds, I hope he fails all the way. It will be an expensive lesson for the country to learn that socialism won’t work here either, but the die is cast.

    What did he fight socialism so hard for during the Cold War if it’s now the best way to govern? That’s my question to the Left. The policies of the Left are a failure from the word go. You know it, I know it, and the stock market knows it.

  12. bse5150 Says:

    May I respectfully disagree with the title of this article. As long as the Democrats have the Drive By Media to cover for them, the deficit will not only be a non-issue, but if people do start asking questions, it will quickly become labeled as the fault of the Republicans. The Democrats were also able to draw on many new voters in the last election – I will go out on a limb here and say that most, MOST were severely uneducated and unaware of what it was they were voting for. (Make sure you don’t vote for that stupid Bush, just pull under where it says ‘Obama’).
    This being said, I would encourage Republicans to go on the offensive and show the people what is happening to them and how it has become far worse than anything Bush could have done. The Republicans cannot sit back and wait for the American people to somehow understand that they have been fleeced by the Democrats.

  13. Peg C. Says:

    Wall St. Obama voters already are suffering from Buyer’s Remorse. And I don’t know anyone of real intelligence who believes anything from the Drive-Bys anymore. They are crashing and burning, it’s just that the death throes are really, really loud and ugly. Bloom is off that rose bigtime.

  14. Nolanimrod Says:

    I wish. You state

    “However, if the economy tanks, Obama and the Democrats can’t even pretend that it was President Bush’s 2009 budget that made the difference.”

    The American people voted for “Change we can believe in” with said change being sort of an amorphous miasma. Having done that, why would the public cavil at something so simple as believing that everything that goes wrong for the next four years is G.W. Bush’s fault?

  15. A Little Late On The Budget - Under My Pillow Says:

    […] Bob Krumm reacts to the budget and explains how Democrats now own […]

  16. Les Jones Says:

    Bob, you probably know this, but for anyone who doesn’t that sign is a riff on a Reagan quote. “A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Jimmy Carter loses his.”

  17. Bruce Rockwell Says:

    The Democrats may “own” the 2009 budget, but they sure as heck don’t own the flagrant borrow-and-spend fiscal malfeasance that got us into this mess to begin with! The blame for that belongs to both parties for sure, but specifically to the glut of supply side lunacy that has been in place for a quarter century, economic mismanagement that ignored the huge cost of public debt for ill-advised tax cuts that went on in the face of spending binges, including the most expensive war in history that brought little or no economic benefit in return.

    “if the economy tanks, Obama and the Democrats can’t even pretend that it was President Bush’s 2009 budget that made the difference.”

    Earth to Bob: “If” the economy tanks? “IF???”

    This is like Comedy Central around here. Sure Bob, the economy is in a sinkhole because of two years of Nancy Pelosi and 37 days of Obama. It has nothing to do with 25 years of debt-mongering fiscal malfeasance in the name of supply side economics. Nothing at all to do with selling off our manufacturing base and technology to the highest (Chinese) bidders. Nothing at all to do with negligent energy policies and corrupt deregulation schemes. George Bush and Hank Paulson had this thing thoroughly under control under Obama came and screwed it all up.

    Yeah, right Bob.

    Ed: Great. So what’s your solution? Apparently it is to answer the problems caused by deficit spending with much higher levels of deficit spending and to follow up the selling off of our manufacturing base to the Chinese by selling them our treasury too. Brilliant!

  18. Bruce Rockwell Says:

    I think it’s a lot easier (for me, as for you and everybody else) to explain the problem rather than the solution. But whatever the case may be, the solution to the problems caused by nearly three decades of Reaganomic borrow-and-spend malfeasance most certainly isn’t more of the same low tax borrow-and-spend lunacy that caused the problem in the first place! Which seems to be your proposed solution.

    Looking to our country’s past as a solution, how did we get out of the Great Depression and our WWII debt? By great mountains of government stimulus via infrastructure investments and wartime spending, and raising taxes on the wealthy to exorbitant (by today’s standards) levels. Obama has aggressively learned the former lesson, and has only anemically embraced the latter. Is this a solution to our problems today? Well, maybe. Hopefully we can also learn a lesson from the success of the Clinton/Gingrich years, which taught us that both raising taxes realistically and cutting spending realistically combined bring great benefits to the economy.

    Ed: A common misconception is that we got out of the Depression not through WWII spending. Actually we were out of it because capital was fleeing Europe as war clouds gathered. There was nowhere else for people to invest once it became obvious that four of the world’s five largest economies would be at war with each other. Then after the war, the United States remained the only place on the planet with an industrial capability untouched by combat. An entire generation of spending suppressed by rationing then let loose on America’s manufacturers, buying up everything that could be bought. FDR and his spending plans had nothing to do with the recovery and a lot to do with its delay.

    You call for realistic raising of taxes to cut the deficit. Define realistic. Tax everyone earning over $500k 100% of their income and you still have a deficit in 2010. There is no realistic level of raising taxes that eliminates this deficit. You talk about cutting spending, but you don’t do that by introducing new programs. That’s what Bush did and it didn’t work.

    Taxes are too high on the investor class. You’re seeing the effect of that in the prices of the stock market. There is a serious argument to be made that a moderate increase that went entirely into deficit reduction might have a positive benefit. (If you read the Romer report you’ll find that such a tax increase did not have the same negative consequences as those raising taxes simply to raise spending.) However, “moderate” is not the type of tax increase Obama-Pelosi-Reid are talking about, nor is there any realistic expectation that they will actually reduce spending. Well, except for defense.

    As I’ve said before, there is no doubt that Bush gave us a recession, but Obama is doing everything he can to turn it into a worldwide depression.

    Oh, I will be happy to describe the solution.

    1. Reduce the budget to $1.5 trillion. Eliminate entire departments and programs to do so.
    2. Eliminate capital gains taxes completely; they discourage long-term investment and distort market decisions.
    3. Reduce corporate taxes to 15%; the high rate of business taxes here encourages overseas investment.
    4. Reduce employment taxes to 8.5%, a level that matches current social security outlays. And apply that tax to every dollar of earned income–ie, get rid of the cap.
    5. Make a completely flat tax on all income, whether earned, dividends, or distributions, of probably about 12% to 18%, and without deductions, credits, limits, caps, or exceptions. The current tax code induces an enormous regulatory burden on individuals and businesses and encourages less profitable business decisions because the market is distorted by tax effects.

    That will put America on a sound long-term financial footing. To fix the immediate problem of the banks: triage, as I described in an earlier column today. Separate the banks into the good, the bad, and the ugly. Leave the good alone, force the bad into bankruptcy, and divide up the assets of the ugly. To fix real estate prices, do nothing. In many areas they are still too high. Let them fall to market levels.

    Finally, to get the long-term debt under control:
    1. Eliminate Medicare Part D immediately.
    2. Raise the retirement age incrementally from 65 to 72, phase it in so that the phase in takes place over a period of 12 years.
    3. Eliminate early retirement for everyone not yet 62.
    4. Reduce beneifts by freezing them without a cost of living adjustment for a period of two to three years.
    5. Reduce the number of people qualified for Medicare parts A and B.
    6. Reduce federal pension and medical benefits gradually. Yes, that includes military, which effects me directly, but we just can’t afford it.

    Stiff medicine, I know, but we’ll have to do it eventually. I’d rather do it gradually now, than when we have to because of hyperinflation and a cratering dollar.

    Too easy.

  19. steve bourg Says:

    Krumm: Thank you. Brilliantly simple, forceful and would be effective. It’s the only way, as you probably agree……along with other measures such as drilling and mining to improve our economy (Norway wouldn’t survive their socialist ways without aggressive energy production).

    One more thing. The President who would do as you and I suggest, would also have to get on the Bully-Pulpit to start demanding that the Statehouses around the country do the same. Slash govt spending and bfts for the egregiously high pension and lifetime health, that govt ‘ees get all over the place. Sadly, Obama will do none of this (duh). He’s doing the opposite, giving some of our future federal tax dollars to states to continue their drunken spending.