From The Archives -- Good News On The Deficit
[Program Note: I wrote this column a few months ago, and thought it'd be a good time to run it again, since the White House just released their own projection of the 2013 deficit this week. The White House is actually more pessimistic than the C.B.O., which is kind of refreshing since, previous to Obama's term, the White House (under Republican and Democratic presidents, I should point out) would routinely present the most optimistic figures, for obvious political reasons. Obama's White House is more cautious, preferring to let the C.B.O. be the optimists. The figures the White House just released: a 2013 deficit of $759 billion, which is down over $200 billion from their previous estimate, earlier this year. So while nobody really can say for certain what this year's budget deficit will be, it is looking more and more likely that it'll be a lot better than anyone thought last year. For instance: we have not had a gigantic political fight over the debt ceiling yet this year -- because we haven't had to. We're not going to hit the debt ceiling until the end of this fiscal year, most likely. Without these improving numbers, that simply would not have been true. In any case, I thought it was a good time to re-run this, chart and all.]
Originally published May 14, 2013
Looks like I spoke too soon. Last Thursday, I posted an article about the expected good news on the federal budget deficit for 2013. Today, the actual numbers were released. They are even better than expected.
After churning the data for the first two quarters of fiscal year 2013, the Congressional Budget Office is now predicting a deficit of $642 billion this year. This is down over $200 billion from their first-quarter estimate, mind you. They are also projecting a deficit of only $378 billion for next year.
As is my wont, I decided to put this into chart form, so here you go:
[Click on graph to see larger-scale version.]
That's pretty stunning, isn't it? In 2013, the deficit will be less than half what it was when Barack Obama took office. In 2014, it will be approximately one-fourth the size of the 2009 deficit. Whether in absolute terms or in proportion, this is likely to be the best deficit-reducing record in all of American history, in fact.
As I said last week, there are multiple reasons for the falling deficits, but the largest of these is likely the continued recovery and growth of the American economy. The recovery seems to be accelerating, in fact, since so far all the revisions in the CBO estimates have been because they've been too pessimistic. Which means the actual deficit for 2013 could be even lower than this chart shows (barring unforeseen economic calamities, of course).
The political ripples from this news are going to spread, as well. The budget battles in Washington for the rest of this year are going to be fought on much friendlier ground than the ones of the past few years. The voices crying for extreme austerity measures are going to be muted. Politicians will scramble to claim the good news as their own (or their own party's, at the very least).
I've always thought it rather unfair for any president to be either "blamed" or "credited" with macroeconomic trends, as the tools at their disposal to direct the American economy are a lot more limited than most people realize. Even having said that, I think that Barack Obama is going to reap the lion's share of the credit for the turnaround in the economy. It happened slower than everyone would have liked, but with numbers like these it is pretty indisputable the direction the economy now seems to be headed. Fair or not, Obama's going to get the credit for this turnaround.
Of course, this news breaks in a week full of other political news which will likely get a lot more attention than the deficit numbers. But these numbers will indeed have a major impact on the political scene for the rest of this year and on into the 2014 midterm elections. So I thought it was worth pausing and taking a look at the numbers today (even if my chart was rather hastily thrown together). Because if this trend continues, the American economy of Obama's second term is going to be a lot brighter than it was in his first.
I just can't help but wonder: wouldn't it be ironic if Obama goes down in history as the biggest deficit-cutting president of all time?
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
On a totally unrelated note..
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/07/10/yahoo-puts-internet-relic-altavista-to-sleep/
Asta la veesta, AltaVista.....
Michale
I just can't help but wonder: wouldn't it be ironic if Obama goes down in history as the biggest deficit-cutting president of all time?
The key word is "known"
My guess is that it's highly unlikely facts like this will ever see the light of day in the "liberal" media
Where is that "liberal" media anyways?
-David
Where is that "liberal" media anyways?
Licking their wounds from all of Obama's scandals and wondering how they could have been so duped for so long... :D
Michale
For example:
In an initiative aimed at rooting out future leakers and other security violators, President Barack Obama has ordered federal employees to report suspicious actions of their colleagues based on behavioral profiling techniques that are not scientifically proven to work, according to experts and government documents.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/07/09/196211/linchpin-for-obamas-plan-to-predict.html#storylink=cpy
How ironic that it is Emperor Barack The First, Savior of Democracy, Democrats And The World In General would be the "leader" to bring about 1984, eh??
Michale
Licking their wounds from all of Obama's scandals and wondering how they could have been so duped for so long... :D
Or maybe there is no "liberal" media :)
-David
Or maybe there is no "liberal" media :)
Naaw...
The evidence that supports the theory is simply too overwhelming to come to any other conclusion..
:D
Michale
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-nsa-slide-you-havent-seen/2013/07/10/32801426-e8e6-11e2-aa9f-c03a72e2d342_story.html
No red lines???
Amazing....
Michale
The Corporate American media is where it has always been, looking out for Corporate interests and trying to make as much money as possible at the expense of good journalism.
CW,
As when you posted this originally, I will repeat that % GDP terms (i.e. encompassing the time value of money) Obama has absolutely obliterated your deficit compared to what he inherited.
But this doesn't mean anything because of how stupid and gullible a big chunk of your country is. Remember that after 3 terms of Republicans blowing up the deficit, the last Democrat President fixed it, before you went back and elected another Republican to blow it up (again). So your deficit is sorted as an issue... until 2016.
The Corporate American media is where it has always been, looking out for Corporate interests
The cads!!!! The MORONS!!! The... The.... ASSHOLES!!!
How DARE they actually look out for their own interests...
Why... Why!!! They are as bad as politicians!!!!!!
{/sarcasm}
:D
But this doesn't mean anything because of how stupid and gullible a big chunk of your country is.
That would actually MEAN something if I didn't know that the only reason you consider them "gullible" is because they disagree with you. :D
before you went back and elected another Republican to blow it up (again).
Obama's a Republican!!!????
Who knew!!??? :D
Ahhh michty, my old friend michty... :D
Michale
michty6 -
Did you see today's news? America ran a surplus last month, of over $100 billion.
Looks like the deficit wars during budget season will be a bit different this year than the past few, eh?
:-)
Michale -
micthy's talking about Dubya Bush. Remember? Clinton raises taxes... big surplus! Bush enters office, lowers taxes... big deficits!
Go back and read his comment again. Hint: the "3 terms" were Reagan and GHW Bush...
-CW
micthy's talking about Dubya Bush. Remember? Clinton raises taxes... big surplus! Bush enters office, lowers taxes... big deficits!
There WAS that little thing called 9/11 that had a teensy weensy bit to do with it, eh??
And Clinton's surplus came from the Dot Com bubble.
So, there are huge outliers on both Administrations. Hardly reliable enough data to draw the kind of conclusion that Michty wants to draw.
I could easily make the case that it was Clinton's Republican Congress that was responsible for the huge surplus and Bush's Democrat Congress that was responsible for the huge deficits..
My tongue in cheek point to Michty was that Obama has increased our debt more than all Presidents before him COMBINED...
This is simply an undeniable fact...
I won't even bother pointing out the loss of US Prestige across the world, thanks to Obama's so-called "leadership"...
Michale