Bush's Spending Record: Does Anybody Remember There's A War Going On?

On CNBC earlier this week, a fallacious analysis , by the Heritage Foundation, no less, was presented, contending that Federal spending growth under Clinton was about half (3%) of what it has been under Bush (7%).

Does anyone remember we're fighting a shooting war in Iraq and Pakistan?

To compare total spending under Clinton, who, by the way, was interested in shrinking the military, with that under Bush, is like saying FDR just started spending through the roof one day, under conditions no different from those on Herbert Hoover's watch, conveniently overlooking the occurrence WWII.

What gives here? Between repairing defense after Clinton starved that spending, and combating the terrorism threat that President also left intact, Bush had no choice but, amidst the response to hostile attacks on US soil, reply with force, necessitating increased spending.

In his editorial letter in the Wall Street Journal offering a defense against Alan Greenspan's charges of Bush administration profligacy, Vice President Dick Cheney pointedly compares growth in discretionary spending categories between Clinton's and Bush's terms.

Finally, let's recall that, after Congress challenged President Nixon's use of impoundment, in court, and won, no subsequent President can be held fully accountable for Congressional spending. Rather than being able to use a line item veto, impoundment, or any other conditional means of tempering Congress' spending, a President is left with only a veto of total spending bills. Which bills tend to be omnibus affairs calculated to dare a President to starve the Federal government of funding, in order to further various other political and spending agendas.

There is simply no comparison between Federal government spending rates during Clinton's and Bush's terms of office. The war in Iraq and Pakistan make a basis for any such comparison difficult to establish, with Cheney's approach being the most realistic. And on that score, examining non-defense, security and discretionary items, Bush is actually doing quite well.