Which democratic president balanced a budget

News from Capitol Hill. Share this on:. Read the bottom line after the jump. February 3, pm at pm. President Reagan took office in Reagan also increased government spending by 2. All presidents can employ sleight of hand to reduce the appearance of the deficit.

They can borrow from federal retirement funds in off-budget transactions. Each year's deficit adds to the debt.

But the total amount a president adds to the debt each year is usually more than the deficit. For example, the Social Security Trust Fund has run a surplus since There have been more working people contributing via payroll taxes than retired people withdrawing benefits.

The fund invests its surplus in U. Treasury notes. The president can reduce the deficit by spending these funds instead of issuing new Treasurys. That makes the deficit by year less than what's added to the debt by year. The presidents who had the highest deficits are still those who contributed the most to the debt. Although most other presidents have run deficits, none has yet came close to the four detailed above.

One partial explanation is that the U. House of Representatives History, Art, and Archives. Congressional Budget Office. Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Accessed April 23, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Accessed Nov. Office of Management and Budget. George Bush White House Archives. Department of Treasury. Social Security.

Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Key Takeaways Donald Trump and his two immediate predecessors are the three presidents with the biggest budget deficits in history. In , the spending required for the nation to recover from the COVID epidemic will likely have an even greater effect on the deficit. Article Sources.

Investopedia requires writers to use primary sources to support their work. These include white papers, government data, original reporting, and interviews with industry experts. We also reference original research from other reputable publishers where appropriate. You can learn more about the standards we follow in producing accurate, unbiased content in our editorial policy.

Compare Accounts. The offers that appear in this table are from partnerships from which Investopedia receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where listings appear.

Investopedia does not include all offers available in the marketplace. Related Articles. National Debt Explained: History and Costs. Partner Links. What Is a Fiscal Deficit? A fiscal deficit is a shortfall in a government's income compared with its spending.

A government that has a fiscal deficit is spending beyond its means. The two expansions were structured differently, which may partly explain their different revenue impacts.

The s expansion, which followed a long period of growth that was briefly interrupted by the ? Although a cooperative economy made the budget surplus possible, the surplus would not have materialized if budget policy in the s had repeated the mistakes of the s.

Differences between the revenue and spending paths taken during the two decades led to quite different budgetary outcomes. On the spending side of the ledger, the key differences were in budget enforcement rules, defense spending, discretionary appropriations, and entitlements.

During the s, Washington postured against deficits with futile gestures that reflected the inability of a Republican president and Democratic Congress to agree on tough budget measures. Although the law threatened the automatic cancellation of budget resources if the projected deficit exceeded the target, the actual deficit was above the statutory limit every year.

With clumsy and unworkable sequestration procedures, GRH induced Congress and the president to lie about the deficit by substituting illusory cuts for real ones and by pretending that the budget picture was better than it actually was. In , with the projected deficit spiraling out of control, the warring branches replaced GRH with the Budget Enforcement Act BEA , a law that focuses on revenue and spending rather than the size of the deficit. Almost a decade later, BEA remains in effect, and although it has not always been strictly enforced, it has helped improve the budget condition.

It has two principal rules? In sharp contrast to GRH, it does not regulate changes in the budget caused by fluctuations in economic conditions or in the cost of existing entitlement programs. It controls only the parts of the budget that the president and Congress directly influence? Congress and the president have had a complicated budgetary relationship under BEA.

At times, one branch has deterred the other from violating the rules; at other times, both have conspired to evade the rules by designating routine expenditures as emergencies, manipulating the effective dates of tax legislation to hide the full budgetary impact, and using a bewildering variety of bookkeeping tricks. As with other budget rules, its effectiveness has weakened over time as claimants for federal money have devised means to outwit the process or disable its controls.

Hefty surpluses have also weakened BEA. Budget controllers cannot enforce the rules with the same zeal when money is abundant as they can when resources are tight.

It is difficult to separate the impact of BEA from the conditions under which it has operated. Had there been no discretionary caps, defense spending still would have been held down by changes in world affairs, domestic spending pressures, and oversize deficits.

The s began with a steep boost in defense spending; the s, with the collapse of the Soviet empire and the end of the Cold War. Defense spending, which began to level off during the second half of the s, continued to fall through most of the s.

If the Cold War were still raging, there probably would be no surplus. As after past wars, some defense savings were reallocated to domestic programs. These programs, which fell more than 15 percent during the s, grew more than 25 percent during the next decade. In fact, real discretionary domestic spending is much higher today than it was when Ronald Reagan launched his campaign to roll back social programs.