Why did the Republican controlled Congress/White House run massive $300 BILLION deficits EVERY year?

From jan 20 2001 to jan 2007 republicans controlled the entire govt and ran massive deficits every year.

2002 - 258 billion deficit

2003 - 378 billion deficit

2004 - 413 billion deficit

2005 - 318 billion deficit

2006 - 248 billion deficit

2007 - 161 billion deficit

Avg deficit of 298 billion - (please note, the war was costing 50 billion yearly so that is not the cause)

Source: Congressional budget office

http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/historicalta...

18 Answers

Relevance
  • Jake
    Lv 6
    10 years ago
    Best Answer

    Despite being a conservative, I know that many republicans in congress are hypocrites. However, the democrats are much worse when it comes to overspending. Guess it's a lose-lose situation no matter who you vote for.

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    Pow beyoch! you got served:

    "It took the United States of America 233 years (1776-2009) to amass a national debt of $11 trillion. Yet President Barack Obama's record large 2009 budget deficit estimated at $1.85 trillion and his own spending plans for the next 10 years (2010-2019) show that our national debt will likely double over the next 10 years.

    Using the Obama administration's own projections, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that, including the record 2009 budget deficit of $1.85 trillion, and huge annual deficits over 2009-2019 will result in an additional $11.1 trillion in national debt, on top of the current $11.4 trillion. As I will discuss below, the national debt will very likely more than double in the next decade because some of the CBO's economic assumptions may be too optimistic.

    As noted above, the CBO also recently revised its estimate for the budget deficit for fiscal year 2009 to at least $1.85 trillion. But unless the economy rebounds soon, that number will very likely top $2 trillion by the end of September when FY2009 comes to an end. According to the CBO, Obama plans to run a FY2010 deficit of apprx $1.4 trillion and almost $1 trillion in FY2011."

    15 seconds ago ved! :

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    Look at the Cons who try to change the subject saying things like Obama spent more. Then have the nerve to accuse liberals of doing the very same thing.

    News Flash Cons! The reason you don't vote Democrat is because you don't like the spending. Yet when the one YOU voted in runs up huge deficits, you justify it instead of being outraged by it.

    Stop with the US vs THEM mentality. You didn't vote for Obama to begin with so why are you so shocked and surprised when he spends? But YOU did vote for Bush so where is your outrage.

    This is why the GOP fell from power. The hypocrisy. It isn't the Democrats fault that they were voted in and the GOP was voted out.

  • 10 years ago

    I can do it too:

    It took the United States of America 233 years (1776-2009) to amass a national debt of $11 trillion. Yet President Barack Obama’s record large 2009 budget deficit estimated at $1.85 trillion and his own spending plans for the next 10 years (2010-2019) show that our national debt will likely double over the next 10 years.

    Using the Obama administration’s own projections, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that, including the record 2009 budget deficit of $1.85 trillion, and huge annual deficits over 2009-2019 will result in an additional $11.1 trillion in national debt, on top of the current $11.4 trillion. As I will discuss below, the national debt will very likely more than double in the next decade because some of the CBO’s economic assumptions may be too optimistic.

    As noted above, the CBO also recently revised its estimate for the budget deficit for fiscal year 2009 to at least $1.85 trillion. But unless the economy rebounds soon, that number will very likely top $2 trillion by the end of September when FY2009 comes to an end. According to the CBO, Obama plans to run a FY2010 deficit of apprx $1.4 trillion and almost $1 trillion in FY2011.

    Keep in mind that these deficits do not include even half of the massive costs for Obama’s health insurance plan, which some experts now project will cost between $1.5 and $2 trillion over the next 10 years. Likewise, these projections do not include any money for the trillions that will have to be spent saving Social Security and Medicare over the next decade.

    2009 $1.845 trillion

    2010 $1.379 trillion

    2011 $970 billion

    2012 $658 billion

    etc etc.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 10 years ago

    If I have to choose, I will take a 200 billion deficit over an Obama promoted 2 trillion dollar deficit. Obama and the Democrats are ten times worse.

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    Deficit compared to tax revenue.

    You sound convincing but what was the tax revenue during this time?

    What is the tax revenue during 0bama's time.

    If I have a job that has a good income(tax revenue) and I am spending(not a good idea at any time) I can pay my bills. If I trash my job, and increase my spending(like 0bama has) and the revenue decreases I am working at a loss.

    FAIL!

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    So the solution is 1.5 Trillion 2010, 1.4 Trillion 2011, 1.3 Trillion 2012...as Obama has caused! 300 Billion might be manageable by economic improvement/reduced spending but Trillions each year---the collation is evident--Obama is a FOOL and we are paying for it!

  • 10 years ago

    They are conservatives.

    Chances are they had to re-fund the defense sector after Clinton raided it to balance the budget in the 90s.

    That's also why it was so easy to nail the USA with the conspiracy that led up to 9-11.

    I really don't care what they spend, as long as it's accounted for and social policy does not suffer as a result (specifically, traditional American law including traditional values and individual rights).

    I am a liberal.

  • 10 years ago

    The deficit has increased since 2007 as well...why did you stop at 2007???

  • Because there was never even ONE Democrat-proof session and each one of those years the Democrat caucus voted for 3-4 times MORE spending than the GOP did.

    You already KNEW that. Someday you should attempt to make a point without being dishonest - if you can.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.