In their daily bid for the best piece of disinformation of the day, we have this from the always dependable Associated Press:
Gov’t downsizes amid GOP demands for more cuts
By TOM RAUM | February 21, 2013
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans and other fiscal conservatives keep insisting on more federal austerity and a smaller government. Without much fanfare or acknowledgement, they’ve already gotten much of both.
Spending by federal, state and local governments on payrolls, equipment, buildings, teachers, emergency workers, defense programs and other core governmental functions has been shrinking steadily since the deep 2007-2009 recession and as the anemic recovery continues.
Nice try, AP, but we are talking about the federal budget here. Not state and local budgets.
This recent shrinkage has largely been obscured by an increase in spending on benefit payments to individuals under "entitlement" programs, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and veterans benefits. Retiring baby boomers are driving much of this increase.
So the AP is parroting Obama’s claim: ‘We don’t have a spending problem, we have a healthcare problem.’ The only problem is all of this (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and veterans benefits) is still government spending. But, again, nice try.
Another round of huge cuts — known in Washington parlance as the "sequester" — will hit beginning March 1, potentially meaning layoffs for hundreds of thousands of federal workers unless Congress and President Barack Obama can strike a deficit-reduction deal to avert them…
"Another round of huge cuts"? When was the first round?
And the "huge cuts" of the sequester amounts to a $1.16 trillion cut over ten years. Or roughly 3 cents on every federal dollar. And, even with the sequester, the federal government will spend more in 2013 than it did in 2012. ($3.553 compared to $3.538 trillion.)
And, even with the sequester, nondefense discretionary spending will shoot up by almost 10 percent since 2008. These are not even cuts, let alone "huge cuts." But again, nice try.
Even as the private sector has been slowly adding jobs, governments have been shedding them, holding down overall employment gains and keeping the jobless rate close to 8 percent, compared with normal non-recessionary levels of 5 to 6 percent that have prevailed since the 1950s…
Again, the AP is trying to confuse the issue by talking about state and local governments. And notice that they are trying to blame the current unemployment rate on government shedding shops. They are that shameless.
A larger-than-usual decline in federal spending, notably on defense programs, helped push the economy into negative territory in the final three months of 2012…
These are due to the $487 billion dollar defense cuts that Obama ordered last year. Which the media cheered. And, in fact, Obama promised he would increase the cuts to $800 billion, even without the sequester. So what is the problem?
The recent downsizing in government is most pronounced at the state and local levels. Most states have constitutional or statutory requirements for balanced budgets. That means nearly all states are prohibited from running budget deficits, while the federal government is not…
It is not only "most pronounced" in the states. The states are the only place where there have been even the slightest cuts. Which is why we need a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
Those calling for a smaller government mostly don’t take notice of the wave of recent cutbacks…
Because they are totally irrelevant to the topic at hand, the federal government’s runaway spending. But once again, nice try, AP. You are very good puppets. And you clearly enjoy having Obama’s hand up your backsides.
This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Friday, February 22nd, 2013. Comments are currently closed.