Is Obama Really The Most Fiscally Responsible President In a Generation?

by gradycarter

Obama Is The Most Fiscally Responsible President In a Generation.

So, I understand that a lot of conservatives will have a hard time with this idea, but other than the bailouts (which would have passed under President Bush II as well) and the spending that came from entitlement programs to help people who are sick and/or out of work – I really don’t understand what a lot of people think that he’s spending money on… I have tried to be sympathetic to my friends who are highly disaproving of President Obama because I know that they mean what they are saying, I’m just not sure why he is such a big spending president…

When I have talked to friends and strangers about this who say that Obama is a big spender I usually hear 2 main things that make him a big spender to them: The bailout, and Welfare. I think that it’s fine to call him a big spender, if you are ready to explain why, and these to points need to be separated, because they really are separate issues.

Lastly though, I want to say that one flaw that I see with this article is that there are at least 2 competing variables that should really be compared to get a good idea of the rate at which spending has increased:

  1. We need to compare economies of scale, and the inflationary dynamics through which the economy has grown. (aka: 1 dollar today is not the same as a dollar in 1980)
  2. We have to understand that this is comparing a rate of increase, and not talking about the actual dollar amounts of increase (which are difficult to compare due to #1).

There is a lot more to say about this, but I’ll just let you read the article now.


Obama Is The Most Fiscally Responsible President In a Generation

Obama is slowing the growth in spending better than any other President in 60 years! The growth in the federal budget has grown 1.4% in President Obama’s first term, compared to President Reagan who increased the rate of spending by 8% in his first term.

In fact in fiscal year 2010, Obama’s first budget, the growth fell, 1.8%. If President Obama wasn’t facing the Bush era financial collapse, the outcome would be even better.

In fact let’s take the recession factor out of the Obama budgets, and see where that leads us.

In 2010, the federal budget increased unemployment insurance by 58%. If we take out the recession factor, it would have only increased by 2%, taking into consideration historical budgets. The same is true for Medicaid.

The baseline we are using is the 2009 budget which was passed in October of 2008 under George Bush. Unemployment insurance was about $360 billion and Medicaid was $224 billion. This is just in line with historical increases of about 2%.

So, in Obama’s budget for 2010, rather than $571 billion dollars, it would have only been $367 billion. ($360 billion + 2% = 367 billion)

That is already a $204 billion dollar savings! If we add on Medicaid, the 2010 budget for that was $290 billion. If we take out the recession, it would have only been about $230 billion, a savings of $60 billion. ($224 billion +2% = 230 billion)

Actually if we took out the entire stimulus package of $900 billion growth in spending would have DROPPED more than 2%, something that hasn’t happened in generations.

My point here is that President Obama is not a spending obsessed socialist, in fact contrary to what conservatives believe, he is very responsible. A drop in growth of 1.8% in 2010 during the height of crisis is pretty significant.

President Obama is turning out to be a very tight walleted leader, and more fiscally responsible, than George W Bush and Reagan, both of whom saw growth in federal spending of 7- 8% in their terms.