Record budget surplus 2 months before Bush stole election...

[kentuck]

Republicans symbol is the elephant. They are known for their long memories. Perhaps they need to change their Party symbol??
=================
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/27/clinton.surplus/

<snip>
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton announced Wednesday that the federal budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 amounted to at least $230 billion, making it the largest in U.S. history and topping last year's record surplus of $122.7 billion.

"Eight years ago, our future was at risk," Clinton said Wednesday morning. "Economic growth was low, unemployment was high, interest rates were high, the federal debt had quadrupled in the previous 12 years. When Vice President Gore and I took office, the budget deficit was $290 billion, and it was projected this year the budget deficit would be $455 billion."

<snip>
It is the third year in a row the federal government has taken in more than it spent, and has paid down the debt. The last time the U.S. government had a third consecutive year of national debt reduction was 1949, said the official.

The federal budget surplus for fiscal year 1999 was $122.7 billion, and $69.2 billion for fiscal year 1998. Those back-to-back surpluses, the first since 1957, allowed the Treasury to pay down $138 billion in national debt.

.......more

[gratuitous]

1. Gee, now how did we do that again?

Oh yeah, we raised the tax rate on wealthy people. Oh, how they squealed! In fact, there was even some loose talk about retiring the national debt entirely, and what that might look like. Then Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the criminal cabal got their greedy hands on things, and persuaded everyone (with a strong assist from their supine pals in the popular media) that tax cuts were just what we needed. Poor folks saw anywhere from $3 to $10 a month more in their paychecks, and the peasants rejoiced. Wealthy people got a little bit more.

[rfranklin]

2. My local paper LTTE claiming Obama was to blame for all of Bush's deficits....

Check it out--

It’s all George W. Bush’s fault. President Barack Obama blames our woes on the huge deficit he inherited. Let’s see. Congress controls the budget. Democrats gained control in January 2007 and wrote the budgets from the 2008 to 2012 fiscal years. During this period, Obama was a senator/president and approved all the budgets. Therefore, the only Bush deficit they inherited was in 2007 of $272 billion, his fourth straight decline.


In FY 2008, the Democrat Congress created a $455 billion deficit, with Bush reining in their original attempt. In FY 2009, waiting for Obama to become president, Democratic leaders Sen. Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Harry Reid bypassed Bush by using continuing resolutions and the Omnibus Spending Bill, which Obama signed, creating a $1.4 trillion deficit. When Obama created his first budget in FY 2010, he added another $1.3 trillion deficit. I guess he figured why not go for the record in FY 2011 as he added another $1.55 trillion deficit. FY 2012 projects a $1.3 trillion Obama deficit.


Yes, no question about it, after creating and approving the budgets under Democratic control from FY 2008 to the present, adding $6 trillion to our debt, Obama needs to weave and duck by claiming it’s Bush’s fault while increasing taxes to cover this largess.


John Skoufis

In case you want to reply-- [email protected]

[kentuck]

3. Likewise, Republican Congress will be responsible for 2010 and 2011 and 2012 budgets?

If we don't blame Bush, then we can't blame Obama. Two plus two still equals four.

[Jim Lane]

4. Remember, though, that's counting Social Security

During the Clinton years, revenue from Social Security taxes greatly exceeded payments to beneficiaries, as the system was building up the trust fund to prepare for the boomers' retirement.

The unified federal budget showed a surplus, but that's because the debts incurred to future retirees aren't counted. If the Social Security system had been treated as off-budget, the Clinton surplus would have shrunk; I don't know the exact numbers but I'll hazard a guess that there would have been a deficit.

The point is that people on DU are quick to say that cutting Social Security won't address the federal deficit because Social Security is separate. It's inconsistent to say now that Social Security is completely separate but to hail Clinton's $230 billion surplus.

[NoGOPZone]

5. There was a surplus for two years of the Clinton era even with the Social Security factor

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/during_the_clinton_administration_was_the_federal.html

[felix_numinous]

6. Then in Sept 10 2001 Rumsfeld announced

2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon. What a heist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU

[IndyPragmatist]

7. The only time you can put a budget on a president or party....

is when the same party has control over both the White House and Congress. Who is on the hook for 2011 spending? The answer is both. There will be a compromise at some point between the Dems and Reps and that budget will not be either of theirs. It will be both.

Clinton and the Republican controlled house did an AMAZING job of working to find a budget that both parties could agree on, and create a surplus. We don't have that cooperation by either party now. We just have both parties claiming that the other's budget will destroy America.