The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Curious how people feel. On one hand, it has increased more under Obama than under any other Pres. In fact, it's grown more under him than all other Presidents combined. On the other hand, both events are not uncommon and he inherited an economic sinking ship.

Percent increase in national debt by term since WWII:

HST 28.9%
HST

IKE 10.5%
IKE

JFK 6.8%

LBJ 13.6%
LBJ

NIX 31.8%
NIX

FORD 35.4%

CARTER 46.3%

REAGAN 186.7%
REAGAN

GW1 56.2%

CLINTON 39.6%
CLINTON

GW2 76.7%
GW2

OBAMA 93.4%
OBAMA


By this metric (good or bad metric ??) Reagan was the worst, Obama next, and GWB next.

Congress raises the debt ceiling, not the President. Congress determines the budget, not the President.

It's intellectually dishonest to tie the debt to the executive branch administration.

Just so you know, I did not start this to bash Obama or anyone else. I voted for Obama twice and he's been vilified lately for what has happened to the debt during his presidency.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Congress raises the debt ceiling, not the President.

OK.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Congress determines the budget, not the President.

I think the President plays a huge role in shaping and determining the budget that Congress ultimately approves. Do you think John McCain or Mitt Romney would have proposed the same programs for the same price tags and ended up with the same budgets as Obama?

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:It's intellectually dishonest to tie the debt to the executive branch administration.

I think this last claim is intellectually dishonest.

Total credit or blame does not reside with any one branch but I think you go to far. Would the budget surpluses Bush inherited (from Bill Clinton) have immediately become the same deficits under Gore that we saw under Bush. Would Gore have pushed the same agenda for the same price tag ?

Congress declares (or does not) war too. Would we have bombed Baghdad under Gore ?

The Executive does not simply execute what Congress lays out. For better or for worse, s/he LEADS.

DarthMonk wrote:I think this last claim is intellectually dishonest.

Total credit or blame does not reside with any one branch but I think you go to far. Would the budget surpluses Bush inherited (from Bill Clinton) have immediately become the same deficits under Gore that we saw under Bush. Would Gore have pushed the same agenda for the same price tag ?

Congress declares (or does not) war too. Would we have bombed Baghdad under Gore ?

The Executive does not simply execute what Congress lays out. For better or for worse, s/he LEADS.

It was the GOP Congress who used the budget as a weapon to tie pork-barrel projects and special interests and it was this POTUS who rejected said budget. It was the GOP Congress who shut down the government for several days.

I would never blame any President for refusing to sign off on a budget or any other legislation (ZIKA) which has pork-barrel projects or special interests or blackmail (repeal the ACA) tied to it.

What if the only way POTUS would agree to sign the budget was if it included a repeal of Citizens United or Hobby Lobby?

All spending bills originate in the House Of Representatives, therefore I contend any budget issues, including the debt, do primarily reside with one branch of government. The legislative branch.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:I think this last claim is intellectually dishonest.

Total credit or blame does not reside with any one branch but I think you go to far. Would the budget surpluses Bush inherited (from Bill Clinton) have immediately become the same deficits under Gore that we saw under Bush. Would Gore have pushed the same agenda for the same price tag ?

Congress declares (or does not) war too. Would we have bombed Baghdad under Gore ?

The Executive does not simply execute what Congress lays out. For better or for worse, s/he LEADS.

It was the GOP Congress who used the budget as a weapon to tie pork-barrel projects and special interests and it was this POTUS who rejected said budget. It was the GOP Congress who shut down the government for several days.

I would never blame any President for refusing to sign off on a budget or any other legislation (ZIKA) which has pork-barrel projects or special interests or blackmail (repeal the ACA) tied to it.

What if the only way POTUS would agree to sign the budget was if it included a repeal of Citizens United or Hobby Lobby?

All spending bills originate in the House Of Representatives, therefore I contend any budget issues, including the debt, do primarily reside with one branch of government. The legislative branch.

Doesn't the President ask for things ? How does that gibe with bills "originating" in the House ? Do they read his mind and then propose a budget ?

I'd say the influence a President has on a budget is HUGE.

At least we are at "primarily" now and not saying that tying spending to a President is intellectually dishonest ... or are we ?

Also ...

Do you think John McCain or Mitt Romney would have proposed the same programs for the same price tags and ended up with the same budgets as Obama?

Would the budget surpluses Bush inherited (from Bill Clinton) have immediately become the same deficits under Gore that we saw under Bush. Would Gore have pushed the same agenda for the same price tag ?

Congress declares (or does not) war too. Would we have bombed Baghdad under Gore ?

The Executive does not simply execute what Congress lays out. For better or for worse, s/he LEADS.

The budget is billed by the House Finance Committee and signed off on by the House Majority Leader before it ever sees the light of a House vote, much less the Senate or the President's desk.

When it sees the President's desk is when he asks for things. He says "I'm not signing this because ..." and offers his own version of the budget. The actual budget is always a compromise somewhere in the middle.

All else being equal, yes, McCain's or Romney's budgets would have been similar to Bush's. Presidents have special interests as well.

The primary reason for the Bush deficit was what? As an antiestalishmentarianism independent I cannot in good conscience assume September 11th was the fault of the Bush administration much as I'd like to do so. There is no evidence which suggests 9/11 would not have happened had a different individual been POTUS at the time. What likely would have been very different is the reaction to the intelligence and to the aftermath. Likewise, there is nothing which suggests the bank collapse would have been avoided under a different administration.

It's impossible to know for fact but I do not personally believe Gore would have bought into the "weapons of mass destruction" rhetoric without tangible substantive proof.

The Executive executes the law. That's his only Constitutional job. If you prefer to call that leading rather than execution I fail to see any point to a game of semantics over terminology.

Comments mostly pertain to the highlighted stuff.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:The budget is billed by the House Finance Committee and signed off on by the House Majority Leader before it ever sees the light of a House vote, much less the Senate or the President's desk.

When it sees the President's desk is when he asks for things. He says "I'm not signing this because ..." and offers his own version of the budget. The actual budget is always a compromise somewhere in the middle.

All else being equal, yes, McCain's or Romney's budgets would have been similar to Bush's. Presidents have special interests as well.

You seem to be ignoring the preliminaries where the President presents policy objectives and asks for stuff to be funded.

Anyway, I was asking how a McCain or Romney budget would've compared to Obama budgets - not Bush budgets. I say they'd have been far different. For example, the stimulus.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:The primary reason for the Bush deficit was what? As an antiestalishmentarianism independent I cannot in good conscience assume September 11th was the fault of the Bush administration much as I'd like to do so. There is no evidence which suggests 9/11 would not have happened had a different individual been POTUS at the time. What likely would have been very different is the reaction to the intelligence and to the aftermath. Likewise, there is nothing which suggests the bank collapse would have been avoided under a different administration.

It's impossible to know for fact but I do not personally believe Gore would have bought into the "weapons of mass destruction" rhetoric without tangible substantive proof.

I agree completely with the highlighted part.

Bush had 8 deficits. Which one?

His first began with things like a large tax cut and then sending out tax rebate checks. "He" actually sent me money - twice ! Think about that. Then there was some medicare thing. Yeah, and throwing gasoline on the Middle East cost a bundle too.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:The Executive executes the law. That's his only Constitutional job. If you prefer to call that leading rather than execution I fail to see any point to a game of semantics over terminology.

True enough be he DOES much more. I seem to think he has a lot more to do with the budget than you.

Awesome feedback. I'll put you down in the "bad metric" camp.

Anybody else got anything ?

You guys act like Bush was something more than just a puppet.

Deadskins wrote:You guys act like Bush was something more than just a puppet.

Bush was the only reason we invented this "war on terror" narrative. Gene Kelly would be envious of the song and dance routine Bush gave us. "Intelligence" says Al Queda has Nuke-You-Ler weapons. Never mind nuclear radiation signatures of U-238 isotopes can be detected from air and space. Then it became a claim of NBC. OK, they don't have nukes but that same intelligence says they have biological and chemical weapons. It was all B.S. because Bush wanted to go to war in the Middle East because a) his Daddy and b) his friends needed government contracts. The only other person who would have overreacted in a similar fashion is Donald Trump. Except Trump would have used nukes because to hell with collateral damage.

I don't take the national debt very seriously. It's not clear -- not to me -- what is a proper amount of national debt measured against Gross Domestic Product.

I am pretty sure that traditional Democratic and Republican desires to "balance the budget" hurt recovery from the Great Depression. About 1936, FDR saw that the economy was improving; efforts to return to a balanced budget kicked off a recession that has been called "The Second Great Depression". In my family, it was lived as just one long depression. (Dad joined the Navy Reserves, at fifteen, just for the extra 25 cents a week and active duty every summer.) I suspect almost everyone felt that way.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote: Never mind nuclear radiation signatures of U-238 isotopes can be detected from air and space.

... a remedial course may be in order.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Congress raises the debt ceiling, not the President. Congress determines the budget, not the President.

It's intellectually dishonest to tie the debt to the executive branch administration.

... so, the President's extortion has no bearing on this...

Countertrey wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Congress raises the debt ceiling, not the President. Congress determines the budget, not the President.

It's intellectually dishonest to tie the debt to the executive branch administration.

... so, the President's extortion has no bearing on this...

What "extortion" would that be?

You guys really are unaware of how our country is in so much debt.

The "federal" reserve is a privately owned entity. There are a very private few stockholders who own the fed. These few elite own stock on the interest of our national debt. These few are the secret trillionaires of this world. The federal reserve act was a scheme cooked up by bankers. One of them J.P. Morgan.

Most countries Governments rely on a central bank. We call ours the fed.

The federal reserve act was created in 1913. John F. Kennedy tried to get rid of the fed and was killed. Lyndon B. Johnson quickly put it back in place.

The Boston tea party was caused by Patriots who did not want to be taxed.

The Father's of this County wrote the Constitution. In the original constitution there was no income tax. An amendment was put in later by Congress.

Just think about it logically. A sales tax alone on all goods generates trillions.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Congress raises the debt ceiling, not the President.

Correct Congress did raise the ceiling, which gave Democrips and Rebloodlicans the ability
to borrow and spend more against a failing cap they will never pay for

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Congress determines the budget, not the President.

Incorrect Congress does not determine the budget, Only the President himself can execute
a budget from which, he then sends to congress which then follows the paper trail to the house
the reason for this? Is either congress or house can make resolutions to it, but all must be
approved by the president himself before the budget can be passed

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:It's intellectually dishonest to tie the debt to the executive branch administration.

Who should we blame then the fairy godmother? I mean seriously...Logic should kick in and say it's not us
creating the debt. we are just the unfortunate victims of corrupt politicians who I might add, Are put into
place by knucklehead voters who can't separate themselves from either the Dems or Repubs?

TexasCowboy wrote:Incorrect Congress does not determine the budget, Only the President himself can execute
a budget from which, he then sends to congress which then follows the paper trail to the house
the reason for this? Is either congress or house can make resolutions to it, but all must be
approved by the president himself before the budget can be passed

What part of all spending bills originate in the House Of Representatives do you not understand?

If the bill never originates and never passes both the House and the Senate the President never even sees it.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:What part of all spending bills originate in the House Of Representatives do you not understand?

If the bill never originates and never passes both the House and the Senate the President never even sees it.

The President's budget request


The United States budget process begins when the President of the United States submits a budget request to Congress. The President's budget is formulated over a period of months with the assistance of the Office of Management and Budget, the largest office within the Executive Office of the President. The budget request includes funding requests for all federal executive departments and independent agencies. Budget documents include supporting documents and historical budget data and contains detailed information on spending and revenue proposals, along with policy proposals and initiatives with significant budgetary implications. The President's budget request constitutes an extensive proposal of the administration's intended revenue and spending plans for the following fiscal year. The budget proposal includes volumes of supporting information intended to persuade Congress of the necessity and value of the budget provisions. In addition, each federal executive department and independent agency provides additional detail and supporting documentation on its own funding requests. The documents are also posted on the OMB website.

The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 requires the President to submit the budget to Congress for each fiscal year which is the 12-month period beginning on October 1 and ending on September 30 of the next calendar year. The current federal budget law (31 U.S.C. § 1105(a)) requires that the President submit the budget between the first Monday in January and the first Monday in February. In recent times, the President's budget submission has been issued in the first week of February.[4] The budget submission has been delayed, however, in some new presidents' first year when the previous president belonged to a different party. The 2014 United States federal budget was not submitted by the President until April 10, 2013 due to negotiations over the United States fiscal cliff and implementation of the sequester cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011.[5] (The House had already prepared its budget proposal on March 21, and the Senate proposed a budget on March 23.)

President Warren G. Harding brought about the enactment of the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, which, for the first time, required the President to submit a budget annually to Congress and which established the Bureau of the Budget, the forerunner of the Office of Management and Budget, to assist in the formulation of the budget. Initially the Bureau was within Treasury but in 1939 it was moved to the Executive Office of the President.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_budget_process

What part of this do you not understand?