New Spending under Bush vs. Obama: Results are Staggering
Jason Attermann — July 25, 2011 3:49 pm
| Barack Obama | Budget | Domestic Policy | Economy | Health Care | Republicans Comments (9) Add a comment
The New York Times posted a chart on Sunday comparing new expenditures by President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama under their respective terms. The chart uses information from the Congressional Budget Office and estimates Obama’s new costs through 2017 (to equal Bush’s two terms). The results speak volumes.
Based on the figures from the chart, Bush spent $5.07 trillion on new expenditures from fiscal years 2002-2009. Obama will have spent only $1.44 trillion through 2017, including saving $126 billion through spending cuts.
According to the chart of costs based on new policies:
- Bush’s tax cuts amounted to $1.812 trillion, compared to Obama’s stimulus tax cuts amounting to a projected $425 billion.
- Bush spent $1.469 trillion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and other defense costs. Based on estimates published on the chart, Obama will have saved $126 in defense spending.
- The Medicare drug benefits supported by Bush cost $180 billion. Obama’s health reform plan will have cost $152 billion, and will benefit more Americans.
- Bush’s stimulus plan and other changes resulted in a $773 billion price tag. Obama’s stimulus spending was about $62 billion less at $711 billion.
You can view The New York Times’ chart here or below.
The New York Times
Sources: Congressional Budget Office; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities