It just makes sense
I just read the most sensible thing I think I've seen on government and spending in a long time. For years the Republican party sold itself as the party of fiscal responsibility and restraint. I've voted for Republican candidates on the basis of this issue. But recently, clearly, the Republican party has clearly demonstrated that in general, this reputation simply doesn't hold true. We are looking at record deficits with a Republican president and Republican Congress. Why? Because the same party controls the executive and the legislative branches of government. Well duh! The President proposed new spending and the Congress can't vote no - that would be disloyal to their president. Congress passes a new spending bill and the President isn't going to veto the bill - he doesn't want the leadership of his own party to get angry with him. It's actually the same story regardless of which party controls both branches - record deficit spending. Kennedy-Johnson and a Democratic Congress? Deficit spending. Bush and a Republican Congress? Deficit spending Carter and a Democratic Congress? Deficit spending. And historically when has the Federal Government shown restraint in spending? When power was split between the two parties. Clinton and a Republican Congress, Reagan and a Democratic Congress, Eisenhower and a Democratic Congress. Whether its because of partisanship, or real differences in values and priorities, when power is shared, the government spends less. The President vetoes spending bills, Congress is reluctant to fund initiatives coming from the White House, deficits shrink (sometimes even replaced by surpluses).
It makes so much sense. So everyone, want to get deficit spending under control? In the 2006 House and Senate elections vote Democrat!