Independent Christian Voice


Ballooning debt under "conservative" GOP leadership

When I was a Republican, "my" party claimed to be the responsible, fiscally conservative party. Yet, since World War II, debt has grown more under Republican presidents Reagan, Bush I and Bush II than under any Democratic president. I left the Republican party last year, registering as an independent, for several reasons: (1) the party placed partisan power above principles, (2) the party endorsed by evangelical Christians leaders didn't reflect the values of Christ's teachings regarding the poor, oppressed and disadvantaged, and (3) the spending without restraint and accountability by the self-proclaimed "fiscally conservative" party was placing an irresponsibly undue burden on future generations. Unless Republican supporters recognize the recklessness in spending of this president and his lapdog Congress, we will pay a heavy price in the very near future. David Broder had this to say in this morning's Washington Post:
For all the deserved criticism the Bush administration has received for its tardy and ragged response to the storm's ravages on New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, the long-term costs to the nation of the reckless disregard both the president and Congress have shown toward paying the nation's bills may be even greater. … [O]ur children and grandchildren will pay a continuing price for the refusal of our leaders to face the reality of an out-of-control budget. The scale of the failure is measured by a set of numbers that Rep. John Spratt of South Carolina, the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, carries with him. They chart the annual increases passed by Congress in the national debt limit. In 2002 it was $450 billion; in 2003, $984 billion; in 2004, $800 billion; and this year, the House has passed an increase of another $781 billion, on which the Senate has yet to act. That totals a stunning $3 trillion in additional debt in four years -- a 50 percent increase in the cumulative debt from all of America's previous history. When you look at that record, the self-congratulatory tone of the Republicans who have been running Washington seems absurdly unjustified. >more


  • At 9/12/2005 11:16:00 AM, Blogger Bruce said…

    I never understood how they could sell a "tax cut" while borrowing more money. It seemed more like a loan check than a tax cut. The government has to pay its bills, we are its source of revenue, so it only stands to reason that if we keep adding debt its just a bill we'll have to pay later. So why not pay as we go and save the cost of all that interest?

    I understand using deficit spending as a way to keep the economy running when other segments are down, but we were seeing an excess of production and lackluster consumption, so what sense did it make to give the majority of the tax cuts to people who already had enough money and needed no other incentive to spend, when giving tax cuts to the middle-working class would have produced more stimulas?


Post a Comment

<< Home