Yep. Which I think is why spending was so high in the first few years. Not only were we paying for Afghanistan, homeland security, all the payments to the 9/11 victims families - he passed No Child Left Behind, Medicare, etc. None of his platform when running for re-election was that expensive. People can complain about the economic cost of Social Security, but the gain will exceed the cost by a mile in the long-run and the actual dollar amount is debateable. Everything else is mostly just reforming current laws and programs. The Republicans in Congress are worse than the Democrats. I expect better from the Republicans. I'm starting to think they need time limits on the number of terms they can run.
The numbers are confusing, as are the definitions, but clearly federal spending is out of control. They just can't subtract homeland security and say "see, the numbers aren't so bad". Homeland security now includes many agencies that were formerly parts of other federal departments, like the coast guard. The costs there are not just new security expenses but many recurring expenditures as well. Presidents sometimes spend their first term trying to get themselves re-elected at all costs. In their second term they start thinking about their legacy and start showing some political courage to do the right thing for the country, rather than what's right for the party support apparatus and the big voting special interests. My hope is that Bush follows this pattern, but I'm not holding my breath. His early cabinet appointments are not encouraging.
President Bush knew coming into the White House the economy was just going into a moderate recession, which, coupled with his huge tax cuts, would severely reduce revenues. Had 9/11 not happened, he still would have been able to implement all of his agenda and stay within reasonable deficit limits (keep defict under $150 billion), thus not adding any more to the national debt, but probably would've used all the surplus. BUT, he would have had to go the distance on Social Security reform and privatization, and I'm afraid that one bit of reform, which is absolutely essential to keeping national debt under control in the future, would have been impossible for him to accomplish. For reasons I can only attribute to lingering stories of the older generation about the horrors of the Great Depression, Social Security is sacred to older Americans, and they will bitterly resist any attempt to change the system. The Democrats egg them on, screaming about how SS reform means "BUSH WILL TAKE AWAY YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY! YOU WILL SPEND YOUR GOLDEN YEARS DYING OF STARVATION!" I can't blame the little old ladies though; it's not like they are being selfish and just gettin' theirs while not caring if they screw the younger generations over and doom our country, they just are too gullible to Democrat and AARP fear-mongering about Social Security. And the clock just keeps on ticking. Tick....tick....tick....tick...... it's the sound of the system slowly collapsing in on itself, unable to sustain the weight of the Baby Boom Generation. And because of political CYA issues, Congress will do nothing about it until we're looking at it dead in the face. I don't blame Bush for 9/11 or ratcheting up defense spending; that absolutely had to be done. I'm just hoping that, in the 2nd term, he will use the considerable political capital he's banked to ram home fiscal conservatism and SS and tax code reform.
I read that a Congressman claimed his farm subsidies bill was "homeland security", that right there is a reason to question what all is considered in Homeland Security. A multi-billion dollar Biological Protection bill can't be considered non-military or homeland security as well though. If it weren't for my desire for Social Security reform, drilling in ANWR, and some-what conservative judge appointments I would be a believer in the theory that we need a Democratic Congress when we have a Republican President. Then Bush would definetly veto some bills and the Republicans in Congress can go back to being fiscal hawks. Your first sentence is why I love and hate politics. On the one hand it's the smart thing to do, but on the other hand I consider myself fically conservative and the thought of Bush increasing Education by 50% makes me sick. I think he will follow the pattern. He talked a lot about cutting spending in the campaign, something he didn't talk much about in '00. He's pretty good at keeping his promises at least as far as politicians go. That's my hope as well. I wish he would veto the Appropriations Bill, eventhough they did stay within the margin, just for the hell of it. He's got to get tougher.
