Obama Smallest Spender Since Eisenhower

I thought this was interesting.

Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Who knew? …


It might have something to do with the first year of the Obama presidency where the federal budget increased a whopping 17.9% —going from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. I’ll bet you think that this is the result of the Obama sponsored stimulus plan that is so frequently vilified by the conservatives…but you would be wrong.

The first year of any incoming president term is saddled—for better or for worse—with the budget set by the president whom immediately precedes the new occupant of the White House. Indeed, not only was the 2009 budget the property of George W. Bush—and passed by the 2008 Congress—it was in effect four months before Barack Obama took the oath of office.

Accordingly, the first budget that can be blamed on our current president began in 2010 with the budgets running through and including including fiscal year 2013 standing as charges on the Obama account, even if a President Willard M. Romney takes over the office on January 20, 2013.


17 comments on “Obama Smallest Spender Since Eisenhower

  1. By the way, does anyone know why the Reagan years (82-85) shows the largest growth in spending?

  2. Reagan broke the then “Soviet Union’s” back. It was a strategy based on noticing they would keep on par spending with the US with regard to the military. Reagan asked what could break them and some aide within his inner circle suggested that approach which worked! The Soviets went into financial ruin and defaulted and led lots of their pro- Soviet countries to turn to the West for humanitarian aid. I know first hand visiting the President of Albania in Tirana and his people in Washington DC afterwards. Of course the arms race not only broke their back it broke their alliances around the world too hence the smaller Russia and a variety of new countries that used to be the former Soviet Union. It also glutted the tyrants of the world with arms and other weapons and hence created unintended consequences that have led up to our dangerous world full of arms and the debt crisis we face these days.

    • You’re right Michael, you and Steve both.

      Thanks for breaking it down. After i asked the question (because i honestly didn’t know why the spending was so extremely high during those years) i googled it and found you guys were right.

      It also glutted the tyrants of the world with arms and other weapons and hence created unintended consequences that have led up to our dangerous world full of arms and the debt crisis we face these days.

      Amen. That seemed to be the opinion of the experts i read too…sadly.

    • Now, in 2013, it’s the US that is in financial ruin and about to default!

    • Amen. Strange how things can change so quickly, isn’t it.

  3. WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s budget would trim projected federal deficits by $1.1 trillion over the coming decade, using nearly $6 in higher revenues for every $1 in reduced spending to achieve it, Congress’ nonpartisan budget analyst said Friday.

  4. President Obama isn’t the “Smallest Spender Since Eisenhower.” The congresses that have been in place since he was elected are. We can thank the extremist in the GOP for his lack of spending.

    It’s congress not the president who makes budgets. The President only proposes a budget the Congress approves a budget. Clinton had a surplus, but why was that? Look at the GOP/Gingrich led congress and you’ll find the answer. In contrast no Democrat led congress has balanced a budget in about 40 years.

    I’m not sure how the figures you posted were derived, but numbers can be played with to show anything. Here is another article you may find interesting.

    “President Obama: The Biggest Government Spender In World History”

    BTW hypothetically, say I increased the deficit nearly three times higher than it ever had been, and then trimmed my deficit by half. Would I have reason to brag? After all even at half it’s still the largest deficit ever.

    Paul wrote that all men are liars. As Christians we need to understand that politicians and those that prop them up are among the best. Perhaps that’s why we can find no place in scripture that encourages us to be involved in the politics of this world. In fact we can only find scriptures that assure us that the Lord has the leadership of governments covered and those scriptures that direct us to attend to the gospel.

    God Bless and peace

    • I’m not sure how the figures you posted were derived, but numbers can be played with to show anything.

      Does that include anything from the article you linked to? ahaha! 🙂

      Seriously, i always thought Market Watch was pretty reliable…but you’ll have to contact someone there to find out where they got their numbers from.

  5. BTW I wanted to also say that President Clinton played a huge role in the country having a budget. Despite the antics of Gingrich and the GOP, he did work with them and signed of on almost all of their contract with America, which led to the surplus. Overlooking his moral failures, he was a good president.

  6. “Does that include anything from the article you linked to? ahaha! Seriously, i always thought Market Watch was pretty reliable…”

    I would think that both Forbes and Market Watch are pretty reliable. Yet here they are contradicting each other.

    Sadly in this day news isn’t reported, agendas are pushed and no story or opinion piece is ever true. When I read the titled of your blog I was stunned. I mean how is it possible for the president with highest deficit in the history of the nation be the smallest spender in modern times? What we see is two sides twisting the truth to get the win for their side.

    America is incredibly divided and reading posts on CNN or Yahoo leaves me thinking we’re more divided since than anytime since the civil war. Both parties are to blame. Their hyperbole and loose definitions of truth create the same confusion and division these two articles do.


    • Yes i agree…it’s hard (but not impossible–it just requires more work) to know when an article is presenting the truth = their own agenda. People in general seem to be aware of this but don’t care–they just side with the article/author who’s agenda most matches their own.

    • What is NOT being factored into this equation is the economic collapse of 2008. When any nation suffers an economic collapse their deficits will soar EVEN with a DECREASE in spending. Is that the fault of the Democrats? Or of the Republicans? There is simply no way to prove one or the other responsible. So it all comes down to ideology. People buy into politics like it were a religion, and most of the religious conviction around these days is mainly political religion. And it is destined for failure. Both parties’ adherents blame each other, but thank God our hope is not in the spoils of this world. The religious people of the world fighting over the things of the world will not inherit the Kingdom of God, no matter which party they champion. In the end BOTH parties are EQUALLY responsible for the massive debt this country has accrued and they show their lack of integrity by trying to wipe the blame off on the other side. In the end it has little to do with “spending”. Of course foolish spending leads to poverty. But wise spending leads to prosperity. Just as wise saving leads to prosperity and foolish saving leads to lost opportunities. It has to do with wisdom as opposed to foolishness and the results indicate that foolishness is triumphing. But we live in a day when simple people offer simple solutions that sound attractive, but lead to ruin.

    • We’ve also become war-hungry George. It seems we can’t help ourselves. I blame all the money spent upon unnecessary wars over the last 15 years for the reason we now don’t have the money to fix our roads or bridges, or to implement many of the needful domestic policies.

    • Well said George.

      pj the world encourages competition and superiority. Even kindergarteners are taught to be competitive. The thing is when somebody wins, another loses. When one side is superior the other is inferior. Christians (AT least many American Christians), it seems, are as competitive as any atheist. But, there is no competition in Christ. In Christ we should serve each other, not lord over each other. If America followed the example of Christ, we’d truly dominate the world. What if we took that money spent on war and gave the entire world clean pure drinking water? Love and good will conquers. Politicians and world leaders boggle the mind with their lust for power and war.

      Sometimes it’s difficult to remember that the Lord placed those men and women where they are. It’s difficult to see we need to serve Him and trust that he has the politics in hand.

    • Amen Steve…totally agree with you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Rooted and Grounded In Christ

Teaching Sound Doctrine & Glorifying Christ


Lead me O Lord

I Was a Teenage Dispensationalist

It's the end (of the end) of the world as we know it...

%d bloggers like this: