Remember that the surplus was a projected surplus, and that much of it evaporated when the economy began it's cyclic downturn towards the end of the Clinton presidency. It took a further hit when 9/11 occured and we found ourselves essentially at war with terrorism. Having said all that, there is nonetheless just cause to critice both the President and Congress (both houses) in regards to the budget.
While I approve of much that this administration has done, I too am disappointed that President Bush and the Congress (both parties in Congress, as neither has worked to curb spending) have not shown more fiscal restraint. The pork-laden Omnibus spending bill, combined with the prescription drug bill, are prime examples of government run amok. I firmly believe the tax cuts were a good idea, and have helped stimulate the economy as intended. The two aforementioned bills run exactly counter to the philosophy behind the tax cuts. Why has this happened? Why has the Republican party, the party known ostensibly for smaller government and fiscal restraint, gone so far left on spending?
First, the Clinton-era deficits were in large measure due to Republican control of Congress (remember, Congress controls the money, not the President). Republican lawmakers fought against nationalized health care and other large-dollar programs championed by President Clinton. With a Democrat in the White House, it was only natural for them to resist his and Democrats in Congress’ programs. They were able to live up to their “Contract With America” promises to balance the budget while opposing a president their voter base disliked or even loathed. A win-win situation for them and the country.
Now Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House. Now, unfortunately, they’re so desirous to keep control of it, they’ve forgotten what it was they were sent there by their constituents to do. Now when President Bush uses the bully pulpit of the presidency to take away an issue from Democrats, it is harder for Republicans in Congress to resist, because he is their man now, not the opposition’s. If they fight too hard to resist the President’s agenda, it will weaken him politically, which they dare not do so close to the next major election. Understand, I hold Democrats equally liable in this. Both those major spending bills I mentioned, as well as campaign finance reform (a clear violation of the 1st Amendment, btw), could only have passed with major support from both parties.
Having said all that, I will still vote to re-elect President Bush, first because I think he has acquitted himself well in the face of national tragedy and threats to our way of life, and second because I firmly believe any of the Democratic presidential candidates would be far worse in terms of social policy. I also hope Republicans in Congress sit down with the President to remind him (after remembering themselves) why conservatives supported him in the first place. I hope Republicans remember soon what they’re supposed to stand for, i.e. smaller government, less intrusive government, and less greedy government.
