Clinton's Surpluses Were Because the Economy Grew, Not the Other Way Around

August 02, 2011

The sky is up, grass is green, and Clinton got budget surpluses because the economy grew much more rapidly than expected. We know this because the Congressional Budget Office (which passes for God in Washington budget debates) told us in 1996 that the deficit in the year 2000 would be $244 billion or 2.7 percent of GDP ($405 billion in 2011). CBO calculated that the net impact of legislated changes between 1996 and 2000 was to raise the 2000 deficit by $10 billion.

Therefore when Bloomberg tells us that the economy grew at a 4 percent annual rate from 1994 to 2000 as the federal government’s budget  moved from deficit to surplus, this is like telling us that the sun rose as the rooster crowed. Yes, the sun did indeed rise, but the rooster’s crowing had nothing to do with it.

Comments

Support Cepr

APOYAR A CEPR

If you value CEPR's work, support us by making a financial contribution.

Si valora el trabajo de CEPR, apóyenos haciendo una contribución financiera.

Donate Apóyanos

Keep up with our latest news