Quote:
Originally Posted by Caltex
Let's blame Bush for the Economy!!!  The President obviously controls the economy, and better yet, laws and government actions all have an immediate effect, they aren't delayed several years, no not at all.
The President does not control the economy. Coming up with charts like that only proves one thing, the 1990's economy was better than the 2000's. |
I agree that Congress has a hand in the budget at least equal to that of the President. But the President also has the power of the veto pen, which Bush didn't pull out of his pocket ONE TIME until he was in his second term. So if you're going to throw this at Congress, you also have to admit that Bush was an active participant in the soaring deficits. In fact, of the 9 vetoes laid down by Bush, 8 have come since the 2006 mid-term election.
Where Bush has exercised a distinct aspect of control on the economy has been extra-legislative. His use of signing statements and policy interpretations has been widespread and largely ignored. Basically, he has run his executive branch as he sees fit, Legislative and Judicial branches be damned. He is The Decider, and he has decided what the laws mean in terms of enforcement, enaction, and particularly policy. He has told his cabinet and department heads that the policies will reflect a certain stance or viewpoint. If that means interpreting the law in a creative way, so be it. All perfectly legal, and most Presidents have done it to a certain extent. But this appears to have been a normal course of business for the Bush II White House.
Bush is a fool. But he isn't a stupid fool.
__________________
Tax & Spend > Borrow & Spend
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
Every feeling you've ever felt can be found in the works of Beethoven, Bruckner, Mahler, and Wagner.
