Saturday 26 Jul
 photo BO-Button1_zps13524083.jpg


OKG Newsletter

Home · Articles · Opinion · Letters to the Editor · ‘Fiscal...
Letters to the Editor

‘Fiscal folly’

Robert D. Allen March 14th, 2012

Reasonable fiscal policies produce jobs and, as the Clinton administration demonstrated, also meet the financial needs of the nation and balance the budget.

Twenty-two million jobs were created during that time under reasonable fiscal policies that did not require a single increase in the national debt ceiling while also balancing the budget and actually resulting in a budgetary surplus.

The Clinton fiscal policies, if left in place, would have eliminated the national debt in 2009. The Bush administration tax reductions and eight years of "borrow and spend" fiscal policies — including two wars fought on credit and large increases in security-related spending — produced only 7 million new government and private-sector jobs, while requiring eight increases in the national debt ceiling to enable this nation to meet its obligations and bail out the Wall Street financial giants.

Fiscal responsibility was not a goal or practice of the national GOP during the Bush administration and the results were a major disaster for this nation.

State Republicans should not make the same mistakes. Elimination of the state income tax in the face of a need for that revenue to repair the Capitol and perform infrastructure work on roads and bridges, while maintaining a reasonable level of other governmental services, would be a serious move in the wrong direction.

As a fiscal conservative, I know that "pay as you go" costs much less than "borrow and spend.” In lieu of bond issues and other borrowing, our governor should pursue "least cost" accomplishment of socially needed and "business friendly" activities.

Reductions in, and the eventual elimination of, the state's income tax is fiscal folly in the face of the economic realities. We need the revenue.

—Robert D. Allen
Oklahoma City

Opinions expressed on the commentary page, in letters to the editor and elsewhere in this newspaper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of ownership or management.

Oklahoma Gazette provides an open forum for the discussion of all points of view in its Letters to the Editor section. The Gazette reserves the right to edit letters for length and clarity. Letters can be mailed, faxed, emailed to or sent online at, but include a city of residence and contact number for verification.

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


03.15.2012 at 01:41 Reply

The author of "Fiscal Folly" has his facts with regards to Bill Clinton's time in office, the debt ceiling and his impact to the Federal debt, wrong. 

During President Clinton's time in office the Federal debt ceiling was raised 4 times, one of these was the famous showdown with the Republican controlled congress led by Newt Gringrich.

Addtionally, the Federal debt when President Clinton took the oath was approximately 4.3billion dollars and approximately 5.7billion when he left office.

It's also highly unlikely that any substantive reduction in the overall Federal debt would have happened by 2009 as stated since this country has a very long history of deficit spending and a negligle one with regards to actually paying down the debt.


03.15.2012 at 02:52


I'm not vouching for the validity of these numbers, but I found this on


> Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase

> Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase

> George H.W. Bush’s Term – $1.587 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase

> George W. Bush’s First Term – $1.885 trillion increase

> George W. Bush’s Second Term – $3.014 trillion increase

> Barack Obama’s First “Year” – $1.573 trillion increase


I find it interesting that during Clinton's second term the amount of debt raised decreased compared to his first term.  While both Reagan and W's second term spending increased.

Clearly the hasn't concluded a 1 term increase for President Obama yet, but it's not looking well.  But to be fair, the low point in our recession was when he took office.  This resulted in decreased tax revenue and unemployment assistance need peaked.  He also had to maintain the wars which were already under way when he took office.

You might not agree with him Don, but he didn't exactly walk into a good situation.