Letters to the Editor

Facts don't support analysis conclusions

A May 1 headline claims former President George W. Bush is responsible for more than half of today's $14 trillion debt based upon projections of future expected tax revenues had tax cuts never been enacted.

Without tax cuts, what would have happened to private sector economic growth? Why give this voodoo analysis credence?

President Barack Obama's first year in office resulted in the worst federal deficit in our history as a percentage of GDP. It was more than twice the annual federal deficit as a percentage of GDP during the Great Depression.

The eight annual federal deficits during Bush's stay in the White House totaled $2 trillion. In the two years under Obama, the deficits total $2.7 trillion.

Bush's last year in the White House, annual federal outlays were 67 percent more than they were at the end of Clinton's last year in the White House eight years earlier. In the first year of Obama's presidency, with Democrats occupying every branch of the federal government, outlays increased 18 percent in one year.

From 2000 to 2009, total federal outlays increased at an average annual rate of more than 8 percent.

Democrats controlled both houses of Congress from 2007 through 2010. Congress controls the purse strings of the federal budget. Since 2007, the four annual deficits total more than $3.3 trillion.

Facts are facts. Federal spending appears sacrosanct to Congress and the media. To the rest of us it's out of control and can't be blamed on a previous president. Paraphrasing a previous leader: "It's spending, stupid!"

Timothy S. Wyld