Skip to content

Debt Added by Obama vs Debt Added by Bush

November 24, 2011

I know we all keep hearing about Bush adding more to the national debt than Obama, so I went and looked up the real numbers. These are official government reports.

I compared the last 4 (four) years of Bush to the first 2 (two) years and 10(ten) months of Obama. First you will see the total debt added by each for the time periods above. Then you will see what it is average per month during those periods.

Bush 4 years  = Jan. 9. 2009 = 10.6 Trillion total

Bush  start of last 4 years = Jan. 9 2005 = 7.6 Trillion total

Obama start of last 2 years and 10 months = 10.6 Trillion total

Obama Nov. 9 2011 = 15.04 Trillion total

Bush 4 years added 3.0 Trillion

Obama 2 years 10 months added 4.4 Trillion total

Bush aded an average of 0.0625 Trillion a month

Obama added 0.1219 Trillion a month

So the facts are that Obama is adding debt to the USA deficit at a rate twice as fast as Bush. Now people of the Obama camp have blamed Bush for all this. But after almost 3 years, two of which the Democrat party had total control (President, Senate and House), it is wearing pretty thin as a continuing excuse.


  1. D Namay permalink

    This is interesting, but there’s one minor problem.

    Obama took office on 1/20/12, but Bush’s budget was in place through 9/30/12. That’s 8 months of Obama’s 1st term where the spending is DIRECTLY attributable to W. Also, don’t forget the LARGEST budget drags on Obama are the Iraq war, the Afghan war & the Bush tax cuts, which republicans refuse to let expire at least for those making more than $1Mil/yr – the largest portion of the tax cuts.

    Also, don’t forget that for 6 years, the bush admin did NOT include the Iraq & Afghan wars on the books. Iow they never showed in the deficit or debt. It wasn’t until obama started putting the true costs of the wars that we see it show up in the debt.

    • Great comments. but the facts remain on the governments own books. All of us can attempt to explain away any set of numbers as being biased for this or that reason, but I prefer to evaluate any time period as a time period, without attempting to explain away any number. For example, noone can argue the numbers show the first four years of Obama (by actual dates) resulted in an added deficit of over $5 TRILLION. Over the $10 TRILLION he started with (again strictly by dates).

  2. tavis permalink

    In baseball if a pitcher leave the game with 3 men on. Then the next batter hit a Home Run. Then the first three runs belong to the first pitcher.(BUSH) W left the game with bases loaded.

    • That is a sports analogy vs a government reality, fine, it’s your choice. I don’t care if you want to bring politics into it, but I’ll stick with black and white facts from the governments own books. Anyone can explain them with whatever slant they want, but I prefer facts. I wonder what you’d say if bush had just taken over from Obama in exactly the same circumstances. Everyone knows the bogus article saying Obama is the most conservative and slowest spending growth president in many years, proven wrong with facts, not slants or playing with numbers. We also know in less than 4 years he has aded over $5 TRILLION to the national debt and an untold but growing commitment to more deficits over the next 10 years (his own budgets submitted to Congress recently show continued major deficits as far as they go).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: