Where is the party of limited government?
I was just looking at the Russmo comic archive and I came across this one. This is exactly what has been happening with the GOP in Washington - they are moving away from the conservative values of limited government that they were elected to uphold. It is frustrating for a conservative like me because the alternative is the Democrats and they will only be worse. No wonder voter turn-out is so low.
Notice the date of this comic is 12/04. It's gotten even worse since then.
(Russmo is a libertarian cartoonist. Visit www.russmo.com.)
9 comments:
It's a sad state of affairs.
I hate being hammered by liberals at work for the reckless spending of the Republicans!!!
I have to agree with them though.
Bill Clinton balanced the budget.
Clinton was elected in 1992 and the budget was not in the red until 1998. In the mean time, the GOP took over the House and Senate in 1994. It’s the Congress that originates the spending bills. I do not think it is at all accurate to credit Clinton. If the Democrats stayed in power, the deficit would never have gone away. The GOP Congress, namely the House, fought hard to end government waste and rein in spending. That was back in the good old days when they had the integrity and the guts to stick to their principles. Many still do, but unfortunately several bad apples are spoiling the bunch.
It was Al Gore who broke the tie in the senate to pass the budget reconciliation act of 1993. That act of shifting tax burden to higher earners, and reinvesting in the economy (e.g. Americorps VISTA)is what lead to the eventual budget surplus, not anything Republicans did.
It is completely accurate to credit Clinton. By your logic, we should be way in the black by now with Republicans in complete control of the federal government.
“By your logic, we should be way in the black by now with Republicans in complete control of the federal government.”
Not really, I said, “That was back in the good old days when they had the integrity and the guts to stick to their principles.” That means the principles of smaller government and less spending.
All OBRA 1993 did was institute the largest tax increases in US history. Tax increases do not lead to long-term deficit reduction. Deficits are the result of too much spending. You hit a point where the spending begins to outpace the ability to further raise taxes. That point was hit under Clinton and it was the Republican-controlled congress in 1995 that began to fight to get that spending under control. That is what eventually led to the surplus. It does not matter that Clinton tried to take the credit. It does not matter that tax-happy liberals like to re-write history. The tax hikes would not have sustained the annual increases in spending.
If you look at the historical trends, you will see that the spending kept going up. Even with the tax receipts pouring in, the government wanted to spend more. If it kept on at that rate, there never would have been a surplus. The deficit would have continued to grow.
Hmmm. I failed to convince you Clinton deserves credit for the debt reduction and budget surplus Bush blew.
I remain unconvinced the Republicans deserve any credit for it. I kinda feel you just contradicted me without offering evidence. Guess we're just spinnng our wheels.
You wanna talk about re-writing history?
It's more than just us "tax-happy liberals" who do that.
Actually, my opinion on low voter turnout is that there aren't enough good candidates on either side of the aisle. The incessant mud slinging that goes on when candidates should be concentrating on actual issues makes people very apathetic. Why participate in the process when you are continuously bombarded with what an opponent will not do, instead of what that individual will do?
I didn’t offer evidence? I guess I didn’t explain it well, then. It’s a matter of economics. You cannot solve spending problems with more money.
It’s funny, I used to watch Dr. Phil when he first started his show and he used to tell people who were having debt problems the same thing.
You have to change the spending habits.
What the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 did was raise taxes. It was the largest tax increase in US history. But, like Dr. Phil says, you don’t solve money problems with more money.
The government was full of waste and over-spending. The Democrats’ solution was to raise taxes. (They lost big the following year.) The Republicans’ solution at that time was to change the spending habits – to reduce the rate of spending growth. That is the only way to improve the budget situation.
It’s like when a young adult gets a credit card and runs it up. If the parents decide to pay it off and give their child another chance to have a good credit history, chances are the young adult will just run it up again. One needs to learn good money skills, not just have the debt paid off. That scenario is fairly common.
Unfortunately, the current GOP in Washington has lost their way. They have been taken in by the false mentality that all of the people want more government spending. It must be something in the water there. The truth is, the people who put them in the majority wanted what they promised – less bloated government.
I doubt if you will agree, but I hope I at least explained it well enough this time.
That comment I just posted reminds me of this past mayoral election. Kevin Curley was opposed to the local option tax because he said it was only a band-aid measure that would just get swallowed up in the City budget and put us back in the same place next year. The real problem was the spending. That is how fiscal conservatives view budget problems. If you are in the red, you are spending too much. Isn’t that how a home or business budget works? Why not government, too?
Post a Comment