Weren't Clinton and Rubin "Deficit-Obsessed"? - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Weren’t Clinton and Rubin “Deficit-Obsessed”?

Yesterday I contended that one of the many problems with the “Clinton tax increases good, Bush tax cuts bad” argument is that most liberals want the higher taxes without Clintonomics. That is, they no longer believe the deficit reduction — even through a mix of tax increases and spending cuts — is a good way to stimulate economic growth and create jobs. They’ve returned to older demand-side economics that says government spending, even (and perhaps especially) deficit spending, is the path to jobs and growth.

Exhibit A: this New Republic piece by Ruy Teixeria on “the current deficit mania.” He writes:

From the Ryan plan, to the Obama plan, to the Gang of Six (now five), deficit mania has officially taken over Washington. Both Republicans and Democrats, while they have different preferred approaches, are single-mindedly focused on cutting budget deficits and relieving the long-term debt situation of the country. Yet unemployment remains at 9 percent and the modest economic recovery that’s underway has shown signs of sputtering. What explains this dramatic disjuncture?

In addition to “deficit mania,” he writes about the “monomaniacal focus” on the defict by “deficit-obsessed” pols in the throes of “deficit obsession.”

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, http://spectator.org. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!

Black Friday Special

The American Spectator

One Month for Only $2.99

The offer renews after one year at the regular price of $10.99 monthly.