October 7, 2014
Bush, Obama, and the Expansion of Government
By David Boaz
A John Allison who is not the president of the Cato Institute makes a pretty good point in today’s Washington Post letters column:
- Charles Krauthammer, in his Oct. 3 op-ed column,
“
Why winning the Senate matters,” wrote proudly about the “power of
no,” which he advanced as key to blocking President Obama’s ideological
agenda since 2010. “And Republicans should not apologize for it,” he
said. “With an ideologically ambitious president committed instead to
expanding entitlements, regulation and government itself, principle alone
would compel the conservative party to say stop.” Whoa, Nellie. Let’s go
to the tape.
- Rewind to 2006, when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress. Here is the same sentence modified to reflect the 2006 reality: With an ideologically ambitious president (George W. Bush) committed instead to expanding entitlements (Medicare Part D, the largest expansion of the welfare state since the creation of Medicare and an unfunded program), regulation (under Mr. Bush, regulatory budget and staffing levels increased while the total regulatory burden continued to increase in absolute terms) and government itself (total government employment and total obligation authority both rose significantly under Mr. Bush), principle alone didn’t compel the conservative party to say stop at all. In fact, conservatives were behind the expansion in all three areas.
- I am not sure what principle means to conservatives. Perhaps Mr. Krauthammer can define it for us in a later column.
- John Allison, Williamsburg
- Rewind to 2006, when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress. Here is the same sentence modified to reflect the 2006 reality: With an ideologically ambitious president (George W. Bush) committed instead to expanding entitlements (Medicare Part D, the largest expansion of the welfare state since the creation of Medicare and an unfunded program), regulation (under Mr. Bush, regulatory budget and staffing levels increased while the total regulatory burden continued to increase in absolute terms) and government itself (total government employment and total obligation authority both rose significantly under Mr. Bush), principle alone didn’t compel the conservative party to say stop at all. In fact, conservatives were behind the expansion in all three areas.
http://www.cato.org/blog/bush-obama-expansion-government --
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
