Why is the American government so inefficient?

[MobBoss]

I didn't. You completely failed to acknowledge my second sentence which essentially anticipated what you just said. Are you this obtuse on purpose?

You are right, and I was indeed obtuse, but not intentionally so. Was just doing three things at once, and was merely replying to your first sentence. I will edit accordingly.

 

[Cutlass]

How so? Surely your not trying to suggest it was a solo effort?



Precisely. Think about that for a minute.

Its congress that comes up and writes the budget. The President either signs it....or not. I find it very funny how the democratic 'big growth' congress under those republican presidents never get hardly a mention in explaining the growth of government during those periods.

I am not saying the presidents dont deserve blame. They absolutely do for signing what they did. But to lay sole blame or praise singly at the feet of the president is just myopia of an epic sort.

Actually, in the US in practice the president (the executive branch as a whole) makes a budget proposal, and then Congress fiddles with it around the margins. And they only do so up to the point where the president threatens veto. The president is more important to the budget process now than Congress is. And that dates back at least to the 80s.

Now what you would have people believe is that the same group of people, in most incidences the exact same people, the Republicans that were in Congress during 3 Republican and one Democratic administrations, were fiscally responsible only while there was a Democratic president. Even though we know damned well they were drunken sailors the rest of the time.

 

[civ_king]

please estimate how dumb it is for a person to have large tax cuts, start a war, start another war and then do BIGGER tax cuts, does that seem really stupid to an economist

But it's just easier to pin it on the president, rather than hold individual members of Congress responsible for their votes and having the apparently naive expectation that the federal government should be small and delegate power to the states.


I notice you didn't mention NCLB or the Mediscare expansion... your bias is showing!

I forgot about those, NCLB has effed up our schools (which are now worse) and Medicare part D was ****ing stupid and Irresponsible economically (BTW both times had WH and Con under Republican control, but you knew that).

 

[.Shane.]

You are right, and I was indeed obtuse, but not intentionally so. Was just doing three things at once, and was merely replying to your first sentence. I will edit accordingly.

Makes sense, and appreciated!

I agree with you that it is insufficent to label it along presidential lines. Congressional republicans did help shrink the fed gov under Clinton, as you say. Newt Gingrich and the republican congress from the Clinton era deserve a lot of the credit for creating that surplus as well....but to hear most people talk about it, the only person in the fed gov who accomplished this was Clinton. Thats simply not true.

Well, as much as so many Repubs/conservatives seem to hate Clinton, we very daft at working w/ the right. He truly was a centrist. And, that said, I'm not great lover of his. He did a lot of things well, but I also dislike a good many things passed under his watch.

And, under Bush, almost all of it was under full Repub watch and by the time the Dems regained control there was little they could do. I realize this is your next point...

Absolutely. However, that period also had some significant issues that impacted our government spending to a huge degree that other administrations didnt have to deal with. And while thats is indeed a mitigating factor, too much money was spent, and gov was indeed increased too much.

I won't debate the necessity of the Iraq War w/ you and how that did NOT have to be a significant issue.

So, that aside, the real problem is that the Repubs made no demands about paying for the wars as they go as they now make of Obama to pay for the various things he is trying to do.

My problem w/ the Republicans (and by that I don't mean individuals like yourself, per se, but those who govern) is that they are stark lying hypocrites about financial responsibility.

First, they have falsely framed the question. They don't want fiscal responsibility (which to means balanced budgets and a move to reduce the deficit). They simply want reduced spending at, generally speaking, the cost of social programs. They have no higher ground or authority the responsibility question and less so, than the Dems. You could even argue that recent history shows the Dems are to be more trusted (not that they won't throw that trust away now).

Secondly, all their BS rhethoric is simply that. They never have any intention of following it when they are in charge. Its merely crass and disinginuous politics to thwart Democratic plans. So, rather than argue the merits of some kind of health care they offer the false argument (evidenced by their behavior over the past decade and past 3 chief executives) of "fiscal responsibility" because it plays better than arguing the real issues at stake.

The Dems are horribly at what the Repubs are brilliant at, and that is propaganda. If Dems were smart at all they'd bank on public faith in Medicare. Polling shows if you phrase the national health care issue in terms like "would you like to see Medicare expanded" or comparisons between how much people trust Medicare vs. private insurers and they would see the path to victory. Contrary to the OP, Medicare is an effective (albeit it imperfect, but so are the best run corporations) and popular program.

Plus advancing the argument on the Medicare argument would make the discussion much easier and direct. People can very easily relate to Medicare because almost all of us know someone who uses it. If Obama said "ask your parents and your grandparents if they like medicare" or similar language this wouldn't nearly as difficult a struggle as it is.

Of course, this also means their program would be to actually extend Medicare rather than what it is they're doing now (which I admit I have no clue about precisely for the reasons above... they're doing a HORRIBLE job explaining it and I fear they're caving in all over the place because to win over key demographics who they've lost to their public relations incompetence...gah!).

/exhale