Need help replying to freeper! Credits Repub. Congress with Clinton's

[CTyankee]

successful economy!!

In a LTTE today trying to "rebut" a columnist who praised Clinton's handling of the economy, this freeper asserts:

"Prosperity during the Clinton administration was triggered by the budet developed by the Republican Congress, which cut taxes to increase consumer spending. Clinton vetoed that budget, then later signed it."

I think that's plain wrong, but I need some hard data to back it up. For one thing, Clinton raised taxes only on the very rich and the rest of us prospered. If anything, I recall the Republicans reviled Clinton and said he'd bring on a recession. I'm trying to find some of their actual quotes.

His last nasty shot: "And, Iraq War or not, President Bush managed to do a fair enough job to get re-elected." Aaargh.

[lapfog_1]

1. Some facts

1. The rich got richer under Clinton too, even with higher taxes.

2. The republicans have held Congress (House, Senate) AND the executive since 2000, and have passed much more massive tax cuts than anything that happened when Clinton was in office... so, according to the logic of your freeper, we should have a booming economy and huge increases in federal revenue, etc, etc (remember that by the time Clinton left office, the country was running a SURPLUS too, compare that to the massive deficits since Shrubya came into office). So what happened? Why haven't those huge tax cuts resulted in a repeat of the 90's boom years?

[Dawgs]

2. It doesn't matter what one freeper thinks.

You won't change their mind, and the majority know who they would rather have for President.

[GOTV]

6. It was a LTTE so it's not just one freeper...

... it's anyone who might be reading this paper. To not challenge it is to give the illusion of consent.

[Uben]

3. This is easy!

Just ask them why the republican congress under Bush hasn't done as well. It becomes ever apparent that the republicans alone cannot manage the country. Given total rule, they became a disaster. The leadership of Clinton and their willingness to reign in his spending is what led to the balanced budget. Ask why the "lock box" was so quickly discarded as soon as Bush became president, and spending suddenly careened out of control. The stock market does not like republicans in the whitehouse. History backs this up.

[BillZBubb]

4. Total RW revisionism.

The 1993 Clinton budget which paved the way for the expansion in the 1990's increased taxes on the wealthy. Not ONE Repug voted for that budget. In fact, they ALL said it would lead to a recession. As usual the Republicans were exactly wrong on tax policy. Instead it did just what Clinton said it would do. The deficit began a steady decline of about $50 billion per year that continued for the decade. Getting the deficit problem fixed was one key element in boosting the economy.

For the most part, all budgets passed during the Clinton presidency were right in line with his initial budget submission. The Republican congress did little to change them. The one time they tried, by shutting down the government, they got slapped down. The only tax cuts worth mentioning at this time were for capital gains. Only an idiot would argue that a capital gains tax cut "increases consumer spending". The vast majority of consumers don't have capital gains. The idea on capital gains cuts is to spur investment. Of course, a dumb Freeper (redundant) wouldn't have a clue about finance.

[CTyankee]

7. I would love a link on this

I would like to add a little credit line "According to the..." when I write my LTTE in rebuttal to this guy. I've been trying on google but can't find just the right one that hits it on the nose. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places...

[BillZBubb]

11. Can you use the official financial and economic data?

You can go to the Federal Reserve or CBO websites and look at the US deficit data for 1993-2001. That show clearly the $50 billion or so drop per year in deficits under Clinton beginning after his first budget.

You can also do the same with GDP growth. The GDP was growing nicely well before any effect the first Repug congress could have had.

I'm not sure what you are after. Do you want a quote from some economist that sums this up? That might be hard to find. Read down in this article about the failed government shutdown and how Clinton WON the budget battle with Gingrich and the Repugs. It might be what you want.

http://www.policyreview.org/apr99/lindberg.html

[CTyankee]

12. Thanks.

I'm putting this together now. Hopefully, I'll have a nice rebuttal to email to the paper tomorrow.

[GOTV]

5. It's almost the exact same congress...

... that's running the country now. All we've changed is the president.

The 1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act proposed by Clinton/Gore and passed without a single Republican vote is responsible in large part for the Clinton economy. By starting to take the government out of the borrowing business capital was freed up and made cheaper for private enterprise.

The GOP at the time claimed that OBRA would hurt the economy.

I can't find a link (help please anyone?) but I believe Alan Greenspan has said that the 1993 OBRA was a major contributor to the Clinton economy.

[kentuck]

8. When did they change?

and why? They are still in control of the Congress and look what happened?

[zbdent]

9. 1. In 1993, not one single Republican voted for the budget

that Clinton sent them. In fact, one senator was talking about the cuts which would take place in 1997. Republicans claimed that it would throw this country into an irreversible depression.

2. In 1996 (1995?), Republicans set forth a budget that Clinton refused. Republicans threatened to shut down the country to force Clinton to sign it. Clinton called their bluff. Country was "shut down". Republicans were forced by their constituents to go with the Clinton budget. This was with a Repuke-led House and Senate.

LTTE writer is full of shit . . .

[zbdent]

10. 3. The only change to the country that happened to throw this country

into recession was that the government was run totally by Republicans as of 12/13/2000 - House, Senate, and President. Previously, it was the House and Senate, and the Repukes were screaming about how wonderful the economy would be with them running everything . . .

[blm]

14. great point - irrefutable, isn't it?

.

[blm]

13. Budget was getting under control by late 94. GOPs had no imput

on the 93 and 94 budget and didn't even submit a budget in 95 at all - that's why govt. was shut down. So, GOPs had no opportunity to even EFFECT the national budget until well into 96, where it was already well on its way to being balanced. GOPs just love to take credit but it's easy to ask them exactly when their budget actually took effect - they always forget Newt shut govt. down over their FAILURE to produce a budget in 95.