Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
How many times did Republicans raise debt limit under Bush?
While the four Republicans in Congressional leadership positions are attempting to hold the increase hostage now, they combined to vote for a debt limit increase 19 times during the presidency of George W. Bush. In doing so, they increased the debt limit by nearly $4 trillion.
At the beginning of the Bush presidency, the United States debt limit was $5.95 trillion. Despite promises that he would pay off the debt in 10 years, Bush increased the debt to $9.815 trillion by the end of his term, with plenty of help from the four Republicans currently holding Congressional leadership positions: Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl. ThinkProgress compiled a breakdown of the five debt limit increases that took place during the Bush presidency and how the four Republican leaders voted:
June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote “yea”, Kyl votes “nay.”
May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.
November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.
March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.
September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.
Database searches revealed no demands from the four legislators that debt increases come accompanied by drastic spending cuts, as there are now. In fact, the May 2003 debt limit increase passed the Senate the same day as the $350 billion Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.
When Bush was in office, the current Republican leaders viewed increasing the debt limit as vital to keeping America’s economy running. But with Obama in the White House, it’s nothing more than a political pawn.
14 Answers
- tribeca_belleLv 710 years agoFavorite Answer
It was, I believe, 7 times. This was done without a lot of hoopla. The fiscal conservatives must have been asleep.
After the economy crashed and President Obama took office, they suddenly awakened and started yelling hysterically. The Republican leadership of course has no credibility on this issue.
Edit: The majority of the debt ceiling raises under Bush were done with a Republican Congress. Even after the Democrats took over the Republicans supported raising the debt ceiling.
- Anonymous10 years ago
I agree with many of the points on both sides that I see here. The answer provided VPOC is factual, but hard to accept if you are looking for reasons to blame nearly 20 years of neglect on whoever happens to be in power. Especially if he is from a different party. I too am not a Party affiliate on either side; I am with the US Army however and can offer my view from that perspective.
The majority of the funding that the GWB administration spent, with both parties approving, went to building infrastructure in Iraq and Afghanistan. Meanwhile ours was crumbling due to neglect. It started under Clinton, who cut too much Gov spending in order to get the debt clock to run in the positive. It got worse under GWB with him focusing on two wars and tax breaks for the rich.
In addition, every expatriated US employee, whether working for Halliburton or any other civilian contractor over seas, pays zero taxes on their first $90,000.00 (2009 limit). With all of the money going to rebuild the Mid East, $90K tax exemption for every us contractor working there, and the tax cuts to the rich, we lost a considerable amount of tax revenues, that would otherwise have been spent to help this country.
The record profits seen by big businesses and their rich shareholders have NOT gone back into creating Jobs as planned. Naturally, it concerns me that we may have to rely on this Congress to take the power away from the rich, and use the revenues to create jobs, but the rich are clearly not doing enough for the rewards we are giving them.
The deregulation of the financial industry that started under Clinton (specifically Mortgage Rules) continued unchecked under GW, until the housing bubble burst at the end of the GW admin. Both parties are to blame for messing up the country. I feel sorry for Obama in the same way that I would have felt sorry for McCain if he had inheritted this mess.
Now WE as US citizens have to play catch up and invest in rebuilding our country, which was grossly neglected for 16 years under Clinton and GW. It should not surprise anyone that this will require a substantial monetary investment to make up for lost time, and reducing even a slight amount of the tax break that the rich are getting will go a long way to funding that.
It is time that we stop putting our parties before the people and recognize that if we don't make sacrifices on both sides, it will only get worse. By stalling for personal or political gains, a Congress person should be fired and replaced on the spot.
Source(s): Observation, Education and an understanding that Polititians have an obligation to their parties more than they do the truth. - Anonymous10 years ago
"Also under Bush, the economy did not go bad until the democrats were the majority in the house in 2006."
Really, cuz I remember standing on the floor of the stock exchange watching it die starting in the summer of '01. Bush did not a damn thing but cut taxes until the first bailout.
Our biggest problem with unemployment and job creation is the fact that we don't have the broad base of industry in our country anymore. That left in the wake of Reagan's deregulation, good call on that one Ron.
- 10 years ago
Hate to break the news to most of you but CONGRESS SPENDS THE MONEY, not Presidents.
Each of those idiots (whose mean salary is $9M/yr btw) needs to come to the table with $10B in spending cuts. Then maybe we'd take them seriously.
And for anyone that says we should tax corporations, please keep in mind that all they would do is pass those taxes onto the consumer. Their senior management certainly aren't going to take pay cuts - hello. It's not like corporations have some money tree in their back yard. So again, we'd just pay higher for their goods/services or they'd send the jobs overseas somewhere to cut costs.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 10 years ago
Good cop, bad cop. My party is good for America, yours is bad. If it's obvious both are bad for America then why do they persist on taking the same sides whose best response on any problem is to point fingers? Replace EVERYBODY.
Source(s): Common sense. - 10 years ago
And we now have a debt limit approaching $14 trillion. Obama's already spend more money in 2 years than Bush did in 10.
Also under Bush, the economy did not go bad until the democrats were the majority in the house in 2006.
You need to broaden your horizons and get off of thinkprogress. That's a propaganda site for morons.
- smsmith500Lv 710 years ago
Didn't Senator Obama call raising the debt ceiling a "failure of leadership"? What changed between then and now?
- Jane DoeLv 610 years ago
Bush raised it 7 times,Clinton 4 times and Obama 2 times so far.Whats your point.Most of that was done under the watchful eye of a Democratic controlled Congress.
- ?Lv 610 years ago
So you're trying to justify new reckless spending, with old reckless spending? What happened to the Change?
Source(s): Not a Rep, Dem, Con, Lib, or Libertarian.