Conservatives were not pleased with President Bush's spending habits. Liberals criticized Bush for expanding the deficit too. So why is it, now that the Democrats are in charge of everything, they are making Bush look like a penny pincher? Why is it that these proposed unprecedented deficits are winked at as not having devastating consequences for us, our children, grand children, and great grandchildren?

The Heritage Foundation, one of the few, truly conservative voices left, posted an excellent piece today: Morning Bell: The Borrowing Bailout Parade Must End. (My emphasis added)

Before President Bush took office, the federal government took in $2 trillion in revenue in 2000. As Bush leaves office, the federal government is expected to take in $2.4 trillion in 2009. In other words, after eight years under President bush, the federal government is taking in $400 billion more a year in revenue. So why did Congressional Budget Office project a $1.4 trillion deficit for the 2009 budget? Massive spending increases. In 2000, the federal government spent just $1.8 trillion. Now the CBO estimates that the feds will spend almost double that, $3.5 trillion, in 2009. Oh, and by the way, these figures do not include the nearly $1 trillion in new deficit spending that President-elect Barack Obama wants to throw at our struggling economy.

Yesterday House Democrats unveiled their first economic stimulus package bid. Current price tag: $825 billion. Everybody in Washington expects that total will go up quickly when the Senate adds its wish list sometime next week. But Democrats in the House are already making it clear that even this soon to be trillion dollar package is just a down payment. The Hill reports: “House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) said the massive bill ‘may undershoot the mark’ and suggested Congress may have to spend more money to stimulate the economy.”

As a nation, we cannot borrow and spend our way to prosperity any more than individuals can create personal prosperity by maxing out their several credit cards. Spending beyond one's means never works. Not for individuals, America, or any other nation...ever.

So adding in the $160 billion stimulus package President Bush signed this spring, the federal government has already pumped $510 billion into the economy and now wants to add another, at minimum, $1.2 trillion. Is any of this working? Is there any science or history that suggests it will? No. As Heritage Senior Policy Analyst Bian Riedl points out: (My emphasis)

Policymakers are basing the “stimulus” bill on economic models that wrongly assume every $1 of government spending increases the economy by approximately $1.60. Is it really that simple? By that logic, debt-ridden, big-government countries like Italy, France and Germany should be wealthier than America. And why stop at $800 billion? Such logic suggests unlimited prosperity could be guaranteed by the government borrowing and spending $800 trillion. Should America be basing such costly decisions on these types of economic models?

The economy sank because people over-borrowed for houses they couldn’t afford, and financial institutions over-borrowed for investments they badly misjudged. Washington’s solution is to borrow $800 billion that it cannot afford. How will adding $800 billion to the national debt solve a recession created by imprudent borrowing? There is an alternative. Long term tax cuts coupled with long term spending cuts. The borrowing bailout parade is what got us into this mess. It is time for a new direction.

Government is on a spending spree bender. It is time to sober up! Bush's billions in deficit are fast becoming Obama's trillions. Where is the alarm and criticism now?

Contacts: Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner,  House Appropriations Chairman Congressman Dave Obey, Senator Herb Kohl, 800-247-5645 or 414-297-4451, Senator_kohl@knol.senate.gov , Senator Russ Feingold, 414-276-7282, Russ_Feingold@feingold.senate.gov , The President, comments@whitehouse.gov or president@whitehouse.gov

P.S. Fairly Conservative posted this link to a petition against the stimulus plan if you care to let the Congress know.

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: