As I watch this new generation try to rewrite our history, one thing I’m sure of, it will be misspelled and have no punctuation. 

George Rebane

We have been deficit spending the federal budget for a few generations now.  And the Simple Simons of the land always lay the deficits at the feet of the current administration.  We just had an example of that (here) from local leftwing columnist George Boardman.  It really seems that these people have no idea how federal budgets are manufactured and structured.  Since all appropriation bills must start in the House, the situation becomes a bit complicated when one party doesn’t control both the House and the White House, and even more complex when Senate approval is thrown in.  (more here)

Even thought the budget process normally starts with the President’s submittal to Congress of a recommended budget, it is usually DOA in a House controlled by the opposite party.  What really goes on then is that the House drafts a budget that it dickers with the Senate to go along, and then winds up, hopefully, as a ‘concurrent budget resolution’, which is essentially an outline for spending for the coming year enabled by a sequence of subsequent individual appropriations bills.  The concurrent budget resolution does not need the president’s signature to take effect.  If the two houses can’t agree on a concurrent budget resolution, then Congress has to pass a series of continuing resolutions to keep the government operating at current funding levels.

So with all this going on to have the federal government finally spend through its various departments, bureaus, and agencies – each operating under their own regulatory structures – you really have to be a double dummy to think that the deficit, let alone individual expenditures, are all the president’s doing and fault.  However, in our land of the free, we also enjoy the freedom to be double dummies; there’s no law against it and you can even vote.

At this point we haven’t even come to the major parts of the budget divided into mandatory spending and discretionary spending.  And then there’s the interest on the national debt – the part we must pay ‘the public’ and not merely government paying itself.  Take a look at the figure below.

If we break down the components of discretionary spending, that’s where the real dickering starts.  The Dems have an advantage here because they are the champions of social programs that easily buy favorable votes during elections.  Historically, the Dems would like to push as many of their social programs into the un-sunsetted mandatory category as possible, and then continue to demand an equal share of the next year’s remaining discretionary spending (and, of course, to increase it through higher taxes).  The tension here comes with the Repubs always wanting to reduce taxes while also making sure the US doesn’t fall behind the bad guys militarily – i.e. only the Right wants America to maintain its white hat hegemon position in the world.  Both parties succumb to various forms of corporate and agricultural subsidies.  A breakdown of discretionary spending is shown below.

So now we come to the special events category like Mideast Wars, ‘quantitative easing’ during the recovery from the Great Recession, and Covid Relief spending after the states variously and unnecessarily shut down their economies to create historic levels of unemployment in the land.  These boondoggles costing trillions really did lay waste to our budgets and the national debt.  Do we now stack all of these expenditures solely, or even mostly, on the backs of the presidents in office during those fiscal years?  (For example, Trump was responsible for the China virus and its impact on the country’s economy, ergo the subsequent relief spending.)

We have always had two basic ideologies contending for money, added to the natural habit of politicians to indulge in local pork.  One side wants big government to be the end-all of control and the source of largesse, the other side wants small government and open markets, but knows that it has to play along with the spending game in order not to be swept out office by a population that grows more ignorant and dependent with each passing generation.  Anyone with a smidgen of history under their belt knows that this is the real dynamic that determines the levels and directions of federal spending.

When all the budget dust settles, we have 535 congress critters, all jostling each other for credit on the passage of spending bills that they think will promote their re-election chances.  So out in television land, what can we make of these self-aggrandizing worthies who failed high school civics (remember when that was still taught), and are now trying to sound like they know how our government works by pointing to this or that president as having “blown a hole in the budget”?