Obama Seeks $1.2 Trillion Increase in National Debt Ceiling, To Pay for More Wasteful Spending

by Hans Bader on January 17, 2012 · 3 comments

in Economy, Politics as Usual, Stimulus to Nowhere, Zeitgeist

President Obama formally notified Congress on Thursday of his intent to raise the nation’s debt ceiling by $1.2 trillion. Congress will have 15 days to say no before the nation’s debt ceiling automatically is raised from $15.2 trillion to $16.4 trillion.

The debt ceiling would not need to be raised to this level if Obama had simply lived up to his 2008 claim that he would cut spending if elected. Obama campaigned in 2008 on a promise of a “net spending cut,” but soon after taking office, he proposed budgets that would add $4.8 trillion to the national debt. Federal spending is at record levels, and the Obama administration has run up the biggest budget deficits in history. “President Obama’s policies would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt,” the Congressional Budget Office said in 2010. That’s many times the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars combined.

The Congressional Budget Office reported last Spring that Obama understated budget deficits “by more than $2.3 trillion over the upcoming decade.” Obama objected to even a tiny two percent cut in the federal budget sought by Republicans, submitting a self-indulgent, smoke-and-mirrors budget that would actually increase spending even faster than previously proposed for 2012.

If you are displeased by the Obama administration’s record spending, and being deceived by Obama, that is apparently a sign that you are dumb, according to liberal “mainstream” media organs like Newsweek. Newsweek this week features a lengthy article by Obama supporter Andrew Sullivan entitled, “Why Are Obama’s Critics So Dumb.” (Law professor Ann Althouse, who voted for Obama but has been critical of Obama’s broken promises and record in office, responds to Newsweek‘s gratuitiously insulting article here.)

Sullivan has been a big booster of Obama’s $800 billion stimulus package, even though the stimulus package will actually shrink the size of the economy “in the long run,” according to the Congressional Budget Office. The stimulus package contained green-energy subsidies that were used to shift American jobs to countries like China, since 79 percent of those subsidies went to foreign firms. The Obama administration has also destroyed thousands of jobs through the burdensome red tape, restrictions, and costs imposed by Obamacare and the Dodd-Frank financial “reform” law, and by using federal agencies to attack merit-based hiring by private employers.

TJW January 18, 2012 at 1:10 am

You really should stop with the extreme dramatics and direct lies that you are posting on your site. Had we not been pushed into this mess by greedy bankers and politicians pre- President Obama, perhaps a pledge to cut spending would have been realized. As it stands right now, the U.S. is lucky to still be viable thanks, in a small part, to some of the things done by President Obama.
BTW The correct way to to REFER to the President of the United States is President(surname here). You all yammer about respecting the U.S and yet you lapse on protocol whenever it suits you.

JWW January 18, 2012 at 10:16 am

@TJW – Direct lies as opposed to indirect lies? Please cite your specific grievance and explain what was said above is a lie. Your only contribution is the frequently heard liberal platitudes. Bush’s fault…big banks…big business…blah blah blah. Everyone has been pigging out over the last several decades. That includes American consumers. Now your guy Obama wants to continue and accelerate that behavior? Your right, everyone has been greedy… including Obama. It’s not a political party problem, it’s a problem of straying from constitutional grounding and reasonable fiscal and monetary policy. Continuing to print money and borrowing more of the same is not going to solve our economic woes…just ask the people of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil and Zimbabwe how well it worked for them.

Hans Bader January 18, 2012 at 10:30 am

Obama pledged to cut spending at a time when the economy had already gone into a recession, so commenter TJW cannot excuse Obama’s breach of this pledge by citing an unforeseen economic “mess.” (Not only was this mess not unforeseen, it was made worse by Obama’s ill-conceived economic policies — Obama cannot rely on a mess partly of his own making, which he exacerbated, to avoid blame for the fact that his “pledge to cut spending” was not “realized.” The poor economy was partly the product of policies pushed by the liberal majority that controlled Congress after the 2006 election, policies supported by then-Senator Obama. ).

TJW’s reference to “protocol” is peculiar, because I refer to Obama the same way that the New York Times and Washington Post do — I started out referring to him as “President Obama,” and thereafter, for reasons of economy, referred to him more concisely simply as “Obama.” This is the same way that I referred to Presidents Bush and Clinton in my writings about them.

Obama has harmed the economy, and wiped out jobs, through regulations adopted under the 2010 healthcare law and the Dodd-Frank Act; a flood of ill-conceived energy, credit, housing, and lending regulations; and lawsuits and investigations of productive, law-abiding businesses by his appointees at the NLRB, EEOC, and Justice Department. These are facts, not “direct lies,” as TJW claims.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: