Grim Milestone: Per CBO, Feb.-April Spending Will Top $1 Trillion; Will This Be News?
Early each month, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issues its "Monthly Budget Review." Its purpose is to estimate and comment on the federal government's budget results for the previous month a few days before the Treasury reports its official results.
CBO's most recent review, issued on Friday (2-page PDF), estimates that Uncle Sam's outlays during April amounted to $330 billion. If that number holds up, or overstates actual results by less than $2.2 billion, it will mean for the first time ever that our government officially spent over $1 trillion in a three-month period (an estimated $330 billion in April plus a reported $672.2 billion in February and March combined). Regardless, February through April is certain to eclipse May-July 2009's previous official all-time high (after TARP-obfuscating accounting adjustments; go here for the detail) of $948.7 billion.
This certainty, the detail behind it, and the federal government's real long-term track record make mince meat of the following off-the-cuff assessment of why federal receipts and spending go up and down made Saturday by Alan Fram at the Associated Press:
A strong economy brings the government more revenue and lower spending. A weak economy in which the jobless and poor need more support does the opposite.
We wish, Alan.
Spending in nominal terms has increased in every fiscal year since at least 1970, whether the economy has been weak or strong, as seen below (source data mostly here):

Spending in real terms has declined only four times since 1970. Overall, if the White House's February estimate of full fiscal year 2011 spending is correct, real spending will have increased by 236% since 1970 (i.e., it will have more than tripled). In the past four years, spending in real terms has increased by just under 30%. Even after the stimulus has been largely spent and was supposed to go away, and even though spending on the jobless and poor is down, the money out the door just keeps going and going and going, now at an annualized rate of $4 trillion a year.
Let's see if the folks at Alan Fram's wire service, the New York Times, or any of the alphabet establishment broadcast outlets report the all-time record level of three-month spending. Based on searches on "CBO" and "Congressional Budget Office" (entered without quotes) at AP's home site, the "Essential Global News Network has not seen fit to take notice of it. I'm betting it will still be one of the best-kept secrets in America at the end of the week, even after the Monthly Treasury Statement is released on Wednesday.
NOTE: The true record (as opposed to the "official" record) for three-month spending occurred in February, March and April of 2010. $115 billion should be added to the official spending in those months of $875.1 billion for a total of $990.1 billion for the March 2010 TARP-related adjustment explained here. If February through April 2011 comes in above this level, which seems almost certain, it will break the true record as well as the "official" one.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
- Tom Blumer's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
I find the interesting thing
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 1:50am.
I find the interesting thing is that there has been a deficits from 1970 except for the President Clinton years and in the last three to four years the deficit has skyrocketed. How can these idiots say with a straight face President Obama and the Democrats are spending less and the deficit is less than under President Bush?
How can they say it? They
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 6:44am.
How can they say it? They have no shame, that's how.
1957 was the last balanced budget
Submitted by Samshile on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 2:21am.
The last balanced budgets were 1956 and 1957. The Clinton years added in Social Security money (a strange age inbalance). So it was not real. In the last 60 years the Dems have controlled the House 81% of the time.
Actually ...
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 8:02am.
... fiscal 2000 had a surplus of $86 billion even without the Social Security rake-off.
1999 shows a surplus of $1.9 billion without Social Security, and $0.9 billion after the Post Office. But if you dig back to the Sept. 2000 Treasury Statement and look at Sept. 2009, it shows a surplus of $124.36 billion. which is less than the CBO history's 124.7 billion Social Security surplus. Subtract out the Post Office, and at that point the deficit without SocSec was $1.3 billion. So I'm not buying that 1999 was truly a surplus. It would appear that Bob Rubin played with the numbers after the fact.
treasury direct website
Submitted by Samshile on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 9:43pm.
has a slightly different acounting than the one you state.
http://www.geldpress.com/2008/07/us-budget-reporting-deception/
our debt did not drop in 1999 or 2000
Will this be reported?
Submitted by ThisnThat on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 7:48am.
Why is this even a question? Isn't NPR currently funded? You know, the only news source for intellectuals -- the only place real thinking men and women can get the truth? The only news source that's worthy of public funding so that they can maintain their objectivity without being pressured by ideologues?
If they don't jump on this and report it to death -- well, then there's no Santa Claus. And I believe in Santa Claus, so my money's on NPR -- literally. </heavy sarc>
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
And.....................
Submitted by Patriot II on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 11:24am.
our dumb ass congress SITS THERE and lets him do it!!! Impeach the s.o.b.!!!