Already responsible (along with Congress) for $3.3 trillion in actual or projected deficit spending in just his first two years in office — thereby breaking the prior record of $3.2 trillion for an entire presidency — President Obama has proposed an unserious budget that, even according to his own estimates, would add another $7.2 trillion in deficits over a decade. Now the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says that even this staggering $7.2 trillion is a lowball figure, estimating that Obama’s budget would actually increase deficits by another $2.3 trillion on top of that. To put the magnitude of that extra $2.3 trillion into perspective, our inflation-adjusted deficit spending for all of World War II was $2.0 trillion (in constant fiscal-year 2005 dollars).

Yet President Obama has had the gall to say, “What my budget does is to put forward some tough choices, some significant spending cuts so that by the middle of this decade our annual spending will match our annual revenues. We will not be adding more to the national debt.” Even the liberal PolitiFact has rated this statement as “False.”

In fact, according Obama’s own official estimates, his budget would add almost $11 trillion to the national debt over ten years, taking it to more than $26 trillion. Adding in the increased deficits that the CBO projects, Obama’s budget would therefore likely add more than $13 trillion to the national debt, taking it to more than $28 trillion at the end of Obama’s proposed decade-long spending spree — about triple what it was when Obama got elected.

Obama’s budget also projects that mandatory spending will surpass total federal revenues this year (2011), which means that even without spending a cent on national defense or any other discretionary programs, we (amazingly) still couldn’t balance the books. In that vivid light, it’s high time for a serious budget, centering around meaningful entitlement reform. As Democrat and former CBO director Alice Rivlin says, it’s time for Republicans to “be bold” on the budget, including (and importantly) adopting an aggressive timetable for the phase-in of their entitlement reforms.

Load More