Gore v. Bush; there is a difference

Max Sawicky sawicky at epinet.org
Fri Nov 3 14:28:39 PST 2000


This refers to discretionary spending, which excludes so-called "entitlements" (Social Security, Medicaid, etc.) It's roughly a third of the budget when you include defense (between $600-700 billion).

Outlays is actual spending in the year the spending takes place. Timing shifts I presume means correcting for accounting gimmicks that move spending back and forth over the boundary between fiscal years to make the numbers look better.

Without doubt, 'non-defense' includes some junk like the mohair subsidy, but 'increase' means not the base amount, but the extent to which it grew after adjusting for inflation.

Bottom line is it's Democratic congresses that cause non-defense spending, not who is in the WH, even if the WH is Democratic.

mbs

Max,

Interesting. What does it mean?

Could you translate "Growth of Non-defense Appropriations by Presidency; Average annual percent change in real outlays, adjusted for timing shifts"?

What exactly did Ford in his truncated presidency that elevates him to the top? In fact, what did these Republican Presidents actually do with these non-defense appropriations? Sam Donaldson's sheep farm subsidies certainly boosts Bush's spending.

Dennis Breslin



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list