Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If Pay as you go was policy under Clinton when and how did that change?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 11:19 AM
Original message
If Pay as you go was policy under Clinton when and how did that change?
Republicans forced Clinton into adopting that policy and it was a part of the reason for the budget surpluses the last couple of years of the Clinton Administration. How quickly did the Republicans shit can the policy so they could spend spend spend? Did Congress make the change or did Bush* do it by decree?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 11:20 AM
Response to Original message
1. It expired and they didn't renew it when Republicans controlled EVERYTHING.
Edited on Tue Feb-02-10 11:24 AM by Pirate Smile
edit to add - here you go:

The pay-as-you-go rule was originally adopted in 1990, during the last period of chronically high deficits, to prevent policy changes that would make the situation worse. It did not guarantee deficit reduction or freeze in place all tax and entitlement laws. It did, however, require that anyone proposing new tax cuts or entitlement expansions come up either with a way of paying for them without enlarging the deficit or with 60 votes in the Senate to bypass the rule.<1>

Requiring this simple trade-off had a powerful effect. As the Congressional Budget Office has noted, “Between 1991 and 1997, most new revenue and mandatory spending laws that were enacted were consistent with the PAYGO requirement to be deficit neutral.”<2> This deficit neutrality combined with spending restraint on discretionary programs and a strong economy to produce a budget surplus by 1998.

Congressional adherence to PAYGO began to decline once the goal of a balanced budget was achieved. But the main departure from PAYGO, before it was allowed to expire in 2002, occurred because of the enactment of large tax cuts in 2001. CBO has reported that of the more than $700 billion in PAYGO violations that Congress simply wiped off the official scorecard before PAYGO expired in 2002, “most of that amount stemmed from the estimated drop in revenues attributed to the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001.”<3>
This refutes assertions made by some opposed to renewing the original PAYGO rule that lack of fiscal discipline exists only or primarily on the spending side of the budget.


http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=933
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaksavage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. We had to fight the war!
and give tax cuts to rich folks.
We had to otherwise our economy would collapse.
It was good for our economy, don't you see?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HopeHoops Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. BushCo made sure that it died.
How else could they run up such massive deficits?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-02-10 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 03:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC