Within the past decade, I’ve written three columns — titled “Deception 101,” “Stubborn Ignorance,” and “Exploiting Public Ignorance” — explaining which branch of the federal government has taxing and spending authority.
How can academics, politicians, news media people and ordinary citizens get away with statements such as “Reagan’s budget deficits,” “Clinton’s budget surplus,” “Bush’s budget deficits and tax cuts” or “Obama’s tax increases”?
Which branch of government has taxing and spending authority is not a matter of rocket science, but people continue to make these statements. The only explanation that I can come up with is incurable ignorance, willful deception or just plain stupidity; if there’s another answer, I would like to hear it.
Let’s look at the facts. Article I, Section 7, of the U.S. Constitution reads:
“All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.”
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
One of the best lines of a good piece: "Adding to the political deception in Washington is the notion that nearly 60% of the federal budget is off limits for spending cuts, the so-called nondiscretionary spending such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid."
Pretending that cutting such things as earmarks, public broadcasting, or foreign aid have a meaningful impact is pure fiction.
James! Wise one!
The alternative of no spending cuts is but a recipe for a financial melt down of our country The polls show that 97% of Americans believe spending cuts are the only way to balance the budget & to get our deficit under control.
So do you want the right to fix the entitlements programs so the left can run that in 2012. That is exactly what left do. They got no real Ideas so they scare the old people that show up every election. They got Zip Zero, nothing but slogans like "Hope" and "Change" Scare and half truths. Facts some times take more than one sentence, one liners are easy to remember but are not answers to the 14 Trillion dollars of admitted debt. they say that the money they spent that was suppose to be in that "Lock Box" will make 14 trillion seem little crumbs. So what does the left suggest, More Taxes. That is a great Idea and give all the Heroin attic more needles and drugs while your at it. Silly left and their followers really believe that they are protecting their interest.
Williams is right on. I often wondered why folks so easily misplaced their praise and derision. However, we should concede that the Prez, as ldr of his party, does, in fact, have a strong hand in shaping the budget, tax policies, behind the scenes. Of course, remaining above the "petty fray" dictates how openly he does so. The Reid-Pelosi-Obama spending spree and Obamacare is ample evidence of this tripartite participation. And, of course, the Prez has veto power which can sway the direction of spending. So, the Prez is not at all irrelevant when it comes to budgets, deficits and spending priorities. Not by a long shot!
I hear that and have been saying the same thing since 2006 when Negative Nancy and her lying pack of fools took over. But no it was All President Bush's fault, that is all I heard from the left. DUH
Spending was exploding before the Dems took over Congress in 2007, of course, after a combination of a Democratic president and a Republican Congress had balanced the budget. Once we had a single party (Bush and GOP) in charge of both for six years, things ran off the rails.
And of course from 2007 until January 2009, Bush still could have vetoed anything Congress passed (and unlike during his first six years, he actually did veto a few things, just not fiscal ones).
Ya and after 911 we really should not of increased the budget, that was a mistake( NO it wasn't) and the week after that the democrats were already finding a way not to waste a good crisis,. After all that is all they do. Let see the unemployment figures were 4.5 in 2006 and started going up from there, then in 2009 when them really smart lefties got in it went to 10 and the Deficit for the last 2 years is 3 trillion dollars and the 2011 FY is going to be near 1.6 Trillion dollars. Now show me one year in history when the right was in charge and had three years straight with over a trillion dollar deficit. Then you try to compare budgets for after 911 and are economy grew, so I guess the facts are that lowering taxes and giving money to help get NYC back on it feet and rebuild the Pentagon that had a big hole it. And for a fact that surplus that Slick Willy touts was only a expected surplus added by a bunch of bean counter in Washington. His surplus also left us without any frigin bullets and a military that was what did he call it "Post Cold War reductions". That is one thing Lefties never learn, the world is full of people that are crazier than some that visit this site and they are leaders of countries. Never never never run out of bullets is a sad but true motto. We are going to need them. So which one did you want him to veto? Let me see the left would want one they could run out and say see them righties really hate children and old people. James your are a very smart and clever guy but you really do not see the weaknesses of the own party you support. They are not respected in the middle east, Europe, Russia, Asia or anywhere as the chosen one promised, he is weak and they already smell the blood in the water.
Synopsis: Bullets important, 687 Billion stimulus to save jobs and hire 200,000 more Government workers. Plus let not forget spreading that money out to the ones that vote for us.
Your abridged version of history is clever but not completely factual.
"Never never never run out of bullets"
No danger of that, when we spend more on our military than EVERY OTHER NATION–COMBINED! And of course we wouldn't need so many bullets if we didn't choose to attack a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Saddam was bad–but the choice to enter that war was a political choice that we will pay for for the rest of our lives.
And of course it was Bush who promoted (and GOP members of Congress) who supported the first stimulus program.
You're trying to have your cake and eat it, too–blame the Dems for spending, then when it's pointed out that Republicans did the same, say their abuses were justified. That's the kind of "unabridged" nonsense that contributes so heavily to our current problems.
The fact is, it will take both increased tax revenues and spending cuts to get us out of this mess–as Ronald Reagan recognized when he increased taxes NINE times. Of course, despite their warm-and-fuzzy memories of the Gipper, modern conservatives wouldn't elect him today.