Republicans vs. Democrats: Who spends more?
Today's Financial News - Posted September 15, 2008
“Republicans like to call themselves the party of fiscal discipline. But if you dig into the numbers, you might find some surprises.” — Charles Delvalle
by Charles Delvalle
Baltimore — (TFN): Republicans like to call themselves the party of fiscal discipline. But if you dig into the numbers, you might find some surprises.
Since 1938, Democrats increased the budget deficit by about 8.3 percent, while Republicans grew the deficit by 9.7 percent - almost a 20 percent increase.
Perhaps most startling is what’s happened since 1946.
From 1946 to today, Democratic presidents pushed the deficit up by 3.2 percent per year. Meanwhile, Republican presidents increased the budget deficit by 9.7 percent. In other words, since 1946, Republican presidents have outspent Democratic presidents by almost 3 to 1. So much for the party of fiscal discipline.
This matters to you, because huge budget deficits decrease the value of the U.S. dollar. Read on to learn more (2nd article on page).
****Make sure you sign up for our FREE TFN News Feed for breaking news, special reports and new financial videos. You can pick your favorite reader. Or if you prefer, you can have the feed delivered to your email.

Next Article: UK growth stocks: Buy Spice (SPI), Pace (PIC) and Domino’s UK (DOM)
Comments
2 Responses to “Republicans vs. Democrats: Who spends more?”
Leave a Reply

October 22nd, 2008 at 10:31 pm
wow good job on your facts. The democrats, all except President Bush, have out spent the republicans, the deficit for them is less because they raise taxes to pay for their spending, while republicans lower taxes, therefore increasing deficit. But then again America has had a national debt since 1776, well at least except for 1835 when Andrew Jackson was president, but ever since then we also have had a national debt.
October 21st, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Certainly the bald facts may point to greater overall spending by the Republicans than the Democrats, but one of the issues that never seems to be brought into such a discussion, is how much local pork do each spend our money for, and how much for legitimate things that our Government should be involved in? I am not going to say that we are currently fighting a justifiable war, but we got there with bipartisan agreement, and we need to finish what we started.
I believe it is a correct statement that since 1946, we have had more war during a Republican President's terms than during a Democrat's, by a long shot, and so wartime spending must be factored into that trend. That has to be the most expensive portion of any President's budget is if we are at war, sustaining that machinery.