Hey, here is one way to get more voter support

[kandrathe]

Which is why the taxes cuts should have been repealed. If you have too much money going out, you have to increase revenue, otherwise you go into debt and end up bankrupt. As much as the Norquistians...er...Republicans want to argue otherwise, cutting is not the only way to get yourself out of debt, you need a balance between spending cuts and incoming revenue.

The other problem with your visual aid as well is that it doesn't show that the budget was created in the prior year. So a budget for Actual year 2008 was created in Actual year 2006 (since most of actual year 2008 is fiscal year 2008 which started in October of actual year 2007).

Or, you can cut spending. Or, you can both cut spending (on unproductive things) and once you are out of recession, adjust taxation policy to positively affect revenues (fewer loopholes, simplify rates, make it fairer, etc).

But.. but... Obama doubled down on the "Bush tax cuts"... a major part of the Obama stimulus was not only extending the "Bush tax cuts", but significantly adding to them. So, just as the "1000 points of light" kinder gentler Republicans dance around backing spending programs (that may or may not make sense), the democrats dance around cutting taxes.

The budget gets mostly created, firmed up, and signed before Christmas. Committee work begins in the fall. I'm not sure what you are basing your idea of "The year before" on, other than it was maybe the month before which happened to be December of the prior year. The graph really shows that the largest correlation to increasing spending (since 1980) is having a Democratic house of representatives.

And, to further complicate the issue, taxation, shifts in spending are often deferred into the future, so while a bill may become law next year, the expenses or tax revenues may be temporally shifted.

And... a final sticky for the wicket would be that the majority of spending is non-discretionary -- so while Bush is responsible for adding to Medicare, starting two expensive wars and for cutting taxes (in the recession) and not reinstating them when the recession was over, he is not responsible for the fact that boomers began reaching age 65 in growing hordes.