Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Why, oh why, do I want divided government?
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, September 14, 2006

Joe Scarborough answers for me (yeah, I know, I'm not a Scarborough fan, but the numbers are compelling):
With Republicans in charge of both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue, spending growth has averaged 10.4 percent per year. And the GOP’s reckless record goes well beyond runaway defense costs. The federal education bureaucracy has exploded by 101 percent since Republicans started running Congress. Spending in the Justice Department over the same period has shot up 131 percent, the Commerce Department 82 percent, the Department of Health and Human Services 81 percent, the State Department 80 percent, the Department of Transportation 65 percent, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development 59 percent. Incredibly, the four bureaucracies once targeted for elimination by the GOP Congress—Commerce, Energy, Education, and Housing and Urban Development—have enjoyed spending increases of an average of 85 percent.
OTOH, when Clinton had a Congress in which the other party was in control:
Under Bill Clinton’s presidency, discretionary spending grew at a modest rate of 3.4 percent. Not too bad for a Marxist, even considering that his worst instincts were tempered by a Republican Congress. (Well, his worst fiscal instincts.)
Right now, curbing the Republicans worst fiscal instincts most likely will be worth the House. Something has got to do it. And while I'd like to see numbers like -10% decrease in discretionary spending among other cuts, I'm of the opinion the natural friction between Republican leadership in the Senate and Democrat leadership in the House will return it to near Clinton levels after 1994. Hey, it's a start.

Oh, and yeah, I know, the Dems are trying very hard to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory concerning the House in November. And, as usual, they may manage it. But a guy can dream.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Congressional Dems threatening to revoke a major network’s license because they don’t approve of the content on one show.

Right McQ, I’m going to vote to split control of the federal government with these folks. FNC, talk radio, and the right side of the blogosphere as sacrificial lambs for... fiscal gridlock?

Impeached Federal Judge Alcee Hastings as Chairman - House Intelligence Committee because you’re ticked off that the GOP wasn’t frugal enough?

Seems that some neo’s are reverting to paleo-libertarian form - discarding good for the perfect.

 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
Metaphorical Matt, I certainly do not think our present government is even good. But giving up pi$$ poor for an almost certain really s_cks reminds me of the petulance of paleo-libertarians.
 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
And Republicans threatening to revoke licenses because somebody shows a boob....
 
Written By: william
URL: http://
Numbers don’t lie, but they don’t always tell the full truth.

When you look at the budget for e.g., the justice department, for example, you get a total 2006 of $21 billion dollars, or about 1% of the total budget. Moreover, much of the increase has gone directly to domestic efforts to fight terrorism. Yeah, I’d like to see them drop that from the budget.

And yeah, it’s important to sweat that, while discretionary spending continues to spin out of control and is now at 2/3 of our entire federal budget.

This takes 10 seconds to verify. Or put another way, Scarborough is a complete dumba**.

Percentage changes are meaningless if they are applied to insignificant portions of the total pie.
 
Written By: Carrick
URL: http://
Sorry I meant "entitlement spending continues to spin out of control"
 
Written By: Carrick
URL: http://
No William, the GOP controlled government FINED the network for allowing a nipple to be shown.

The GOP has not threaten to revoke licensure, however, when any network portraits the Bush Administration in a narrative unapproved by said administration.

The difference may be lost upon you.
 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
The Republican congress that curbed the excesses of Clinton and lead to a modest reduction in the growth rate of domestic spending no longer exists. In fact it ceased to exist around 1998, when this current run-up in spending really started, not the day that Bush took office.

Unfortunately, the Republicans found out in the 1990’s that cutting the government goodies and being fiscally responsible doesn’t win votes or make you popular, it makes you the "Gingrich who stole Christmas". In particular their experience with getting blamed for the government shutdowns left a real scar on the Republican party, who after all really wanted to be popular like Bill Clinton.

In the end the Republicans figured out that the American people want to be pandered to, they want their government to take money from other people and give it to them, and they want the government to solve ALL of their problems. In short they learned how to be Democrats.

With this set of facts what makes anybody believe that there will be any friction between Democrats and Republicans that will restrain spending? The only friction will be on foreign policy, not the level of spending. The Democrats main objection to Bush’s domestic spending is that he hasn’t spent enough.

What we will end up with is in order to keep sending goodies home the Republicans are going to have to compromise and agree to a tax increase.

That is my prediction.
 
Written By: DS
URL: http://
Percentage changes are meaningless if they are applied to insignificant portions of the total pie.
Not it your stated ideology is to spend less and shrink government.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Why, oh why, do I want divided government?
Posted by: McQ
I don’t know because you’re not going to get it. You’re going to get Harry Read AND Nancy Pelosi, not one or the other...Oh well I don’t think you’re going to get it. And both you and the Democrats can cry in your beers, I guess.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
It is a distinction without a difference. Fines of the enormous amounts that the Republicans have recently created result in content control, pure and simple. The same network had grave doubts as to whether it could run the movie Saving Private Ryan, under the new censorship established by the Republicans.

I am against censorship. I am against it when either Democrats or Republicans do it. It apparently only bothers you when the Democrats do it. And if you think that what this Administration is doing qualifies as "good," but not "perfect" then you would have loved the Johnson Administration.
 
Written By: william
URL: http://
As long the the margins in the House and/or Senate are close, the spending will be high. It’s the price for votes.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
McQ:

Have you lived in the Soviet Union? I am just curious, because you quote someone who characterizes Bill Clinton as a marxist.

Ask around. See how many people who used to live under communist totalitarianism agree with that sentiment. How many do you think honestly view Clinton in such terms?
 
Written By: Nicolai
URL: http://www.nicolaibrown.com/iraq/timeline.html
Have you lived in the Soviet Union? I am just curious, because you quote someone who characterizes Bill Clinton as a marxist.
What has that to do with anything?
Ask around. See how many people who used to live under communist totalitarianism agree with that sentiment. How many do you think honestly view Clinton in such terms?
I have no idea and really don’t care since it has nothing, even remotely, to do with this post.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider