Even the Conservative Washington Times…

… is reporting negatively on current deficit and spending levels:

“In the historical context, you can think of times when politicians have gone for big-government solutions, and you can think of times when politicians have gone for tax cuts and limited government,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the budget-watchdog Concord Coalition.

“What’s been unique about this Congress is they’ve tried to do both at once,” he said.

But we can all be thankful, says Lindsey “I was worried about blowjobs not budgets in the 1990s” Graham:

Republican leaders also say spending is more restrained than it would have been if Democrats were in control.

“The Republican Party could be fairly criticized for not having the discipline in spending we should have,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, who voted against the Medicare bill last month because of its huge costs. “But we’re the best game in town. Compared to the Democrats, we’re great.”

Due to the onerous time commitment from his role as a leading member of the impeachment brigade, Graham must have failed to notice that the size of the federal government shrank when the Senate and White House were under Democratic control in the 1990s.(*)

AB

(*) The above link shows that the number of executive and legislative branch employees fell from 1985 to 2000; the number of judicial branch employees actually increased. Because the executive branch employs by far the most people, that decline in the 1990s drives the total change. The following graph, from this post from July, shows Federal spending as a percent of GDP falling sharply under Clinton — from 22% of GDP to 18.5% of GDP: