Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Split government. Checks and balances, baby.
|
I heard an argument the other day that I thought was rather strong that if Gore had been elected then the budgets would not have been so bad. Not that Gore is not a tax and spender, its just that in this partisan atmosphere anything a Dem president offers will be immediately rejected by the Repubs, and anything the Repubs offered would be rejected by the Dem pres. This is what happened during the Clinton presidency. Every time Clinton came out with a budget the Repubs would say it is DOA because it spends to much.
That is what kept spending down during the Clinton administration, the Republicans just never accepted anything Clinton wanted and Clinton never went along with what the Republicans wanted to spend money on.
With Bush being a Republican he has to go along with whatever the Republican Congress dishes up (he doesn't have to but seems to want to).
But from what I understand, Federal Spending (even if you take out Homeland Security and Defense - really) has incrased more under Bush than under Clinton.
Anyway just a thought.
