OBAMA’S ‘SPENDING FREEZE’ DOES NOT MEAN SPENDING REDUCTION

OBAMA’S ‘SPENDING FREEZE’ DOES NOT MEAN SPENDING REDUCTION

Recently, President Obama touted a spending freeze targeted at reducing the budget deficit. In the State of the Union, (which is referenced in the below video) Obama said that defense spending, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security would not be affected by these freezes. Later in the same speech, the President stated that Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security costs were going to soar.

So, let’s use the White House’s own projected budget numbers to show how this “freeze” is totally irrelevant to spending.

2009 estimates show that Medicaid ($353 Billion), Medicare ($431 Billion), Social Security ($680 Billion), and Defense ($690 Billion) total $2.154 trillion out of a $4.0 trillion spending spree. These areas account for nearly 54 percent of all spending.

On top of that, other areas of the government are going to see HUGE increases in spending in 2010. International affairs is going from $34 to $50 billion, energy is going from $8 to $22 Billion, transportation from $92 to $106 billion (up from $77 billion in ’08), education from $79 billion to $134 billion, income security from $519 to $547 billion (from about $300 billion in ’08), and interest on the debt is going to go from $150 billion in 2009 to $400 billion by 2013.

So when the President says the government is tightening its belt, he means they will double their waist size then tighten their belt.

In fact, according to the White House budget estimates, the spending will be back at $4 trillion by 2014. That means the hundreds of billions gone from TARP and bailouts will be placed by other areas of fiscal inflation. So where is most of that money going? The answer appears to be social programs and the interest on the federal debt.



Looks like we can chalk up another victory for Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society!
Do you think the above numbers reflect an increase or decrease in the number of people on government programs?