The Hello Bar is a simple web toolbar that engages users and communicates a call to action.

I’m sure Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Chair of the Democratic National Committee, thinks she’s super-clever, but I don’t think the “Be thankful we got that foul Bush economy turned around” strategy is going to be a big winner in 2012.

What’s that? You think I’m wildly exaggerating? You don’t believe that she of the ego large enough to choke Galactus would ever suggest that the Democrats and Barack Obama have the economy going in the right direction. You don’t think a savvy operator would have the gumption to double down on a set of economic policies that wouldn’t work in a game of Sim City?

Read on, friends. Read on.

REP. SCHULTZ: Let, let me just add, though, David, that it is so disingenuous for Reince to be saying that jobs are their priority. I mean, we’ve got a party who’ve, who’ve been in charge of the House of Representatives for the last six months, haven’t brought a single jobs bill to the floor. So, I mean…

MR. GREGORY: All right. Well, let’s talk more, let’s talk more about the economy in some more detail. This is the president’s standing in terms of handling the economy in the public’s eye, and it’s pretty negative right now. Sixty percent almost, 59 percent, disapprove of the president’s handling of the economy. And there are facts that back that up that are difficult for this administration and for the Democrats: unemployment’s up 25 percent since Inauguration Day for President Obama; the debt’s up 35 percent, over $14 trillion; a gallon of gas up over 100 percent, with gas $3.75, higher than that in certain parts of the country. Why should Americans trust Democratic governance right now on the economy, and particularly the president’s?

REP. SCHULTZ: Because we were able to, under President Obama’s leadership, turn this economy around. When President Obama took office…

MR. GREGORY: Whoa, whoa, let me just stop you there. Clearly, the economy has not been turned around. I mean, you just saw those numbers.

REP. SCHULTZ: It, it certainly-it has…

MR. GREGORY: Americans don’t believe that’s the case.

REP. SCHULTZ: Well, we, we were-when President Obama took office, the month before he was inaugurated, the economy was bleeding 750,000 jobs a month, David, and we were not headed in the right direction. Now, I know we-and President Obama has said we have a long way to go. We’d like the pace of recovery to, to, to be picked up. But we have definitely begun to turn the economy around. You, you fast-forward two and a half years later now, and the economy has created 2.1 million private sector jobs, a million of those jobs just in the last six months. We’ve had 15 straight months of job growth.

There is so much cherry-picking, misdirection, and flat out fibbery in what Ms. Wasserman-Schultz said that I couldn’t possibly get it all into one blog post. I’m sure I’ll have ample opportunities to refute nearly every word, including the articles, over the next year since it’s become abundantly clear this is the Democrats’ plan to win the election in 2012.

I’m glad, in a way. The talking points regurgitated by the DNC Chair are the same talking points used by the now-former Speaker of the House in the summer before she got beaten worse than any Speaker since the 1920s. They’ll be easy to knock down because they’ve been knocked down once before and our economic situation hasn’t gotten any better. In fact, unemployment has gotten a bit worse and our deficit has continued to rise like my blood pressure during a Washington Capitals playoff run.

However, let me provide one little stat here, just for fun. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz claims that Democrats have created 2.1 million private-sector jobs in 2 1/2 years and I’m willing to take her at her word for the next paragraph or so. But let’s look at how much of our money she and her comrades have spend to get that job increase.

I understand, by the way, that I will likely leave out a few dozen billion dollars somewhere along that way. I’m not including the pre-Obama bailouts for Bear Stearns and Citigroup, the billions the Fed ponied up (since they are, at least on paper, not subject to the whims of either political party), or TARP I. I’ll just go with the big, basic programs I can remember since the Age of Obama began in January, 2009.

  • 2/09, The Stimulus Bill: $787 billion…whoops! I meant $862 billion. (though high-end numbers puts that total, including debt service at well over $3 trillion, I’ll go with the “official” number).
  • Summer/09, Cash for Clunkers: $3 billion.
  • 3/10, Jobs Bill: $17.6 billion.
  • 3/10, Obamacare Bill: $1 trillion, at least. I’m hedging the numbers here because I don’t think anyone knows exactly how much Obamacare will cost once it’s run its 10-year course. However, two things are true. First, the President touted the bill as a job-creator. Second, it’s already affected how private companies do business.
  • 8/10, State Payroll Bailout Bill: $26 billion.
  • 9/10, Small Business Bill: $30 billion.
  • 12/10, Tax Hike Prevention Act: $858 billion.

All those bills come to a grand total of 2,796,600,000,000, or almost 3 trillion dollars (and remember, I know I haven’t included everything). That’s how much of our money the Democrats have obligated to job-creation. Now, understand that much of that money has not been spent. Obamacare and parts of the Vote Buying Act Stimulus Bill phase spending in over several years; however, the money is obligated. Businesses and investors — the people who create jobs — have to consider that money spent when they make their 5- and 10- year business plans.

So how much did Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and her Merry Band of spend-happy Democrats pay for each one of those 2.1 million jobs she says they’ve created? A little division gives us the answer: $1,331,714.29 per job.

Let me say that again. This administration has spent over one and one-quarter million dollars per job created in the past 2 1/2 years. And they’re proud of that? They want to hang their hat on that?

Let me put this another way. There are, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 13.9 million unemployed people looking for work in the United States. With the almost $3 trillion the Democrats have spent thus to create jobs thus far, they could have given each one of them $200,000 dollars with over $16 billion to spare. They could have given each of the 153.7 million people in the labor market right now $18,000 and would have saved us taxpayers $30 billion.

But, hey. Far be it from me to suggest that Debbie Wasserman-Schultz find another strategy for 2012. I’m sure she’s very proud of the way she’s burning through out money to “turn this economy around”. Let her sing the praises of the Democrats’ left-wing economic plan to the highest heavens for the next 18 months. I’ll welcome the complete ruin it brings her and her party.

Meanwhile, Republicans, I can’t help but notice I’ve provided you with a few useful numbers. You all think you could work them into a few speeches or campaign ads over the next few months?

UPDATE: Thanks to James Pethokoukis, I added the December tax bill and adjusted the numbers accordingly. Ken Gardiner brought the Home Star “Cash for Caulkers” program to my attention. Though it hasn’t passed Congress, the Senate is likely to take it up this year. If passed, it’ll likely add $6 billion to the total.

One note. A couple of the bills I included weren’t spending bills, but tax cut bills. Now, we conservatives believe that a tax cut isn’t actually a government expenditure — it costs taxpayers nothing to keep their own money. However, Democrats are adamant that any tax cut is a “tax expenditure” (or as the President called them this past April, “spending in the tax code”). Given that, I think it’s accurate to include them here.

TwitterFacebookStumbleUponGoogle BookmarksDeliciousFriendFeedTechnorati FavoritesGoogle GmailRedditWordPressShare

Tags: , ,

5 Responses to “The Post Where I Break Out Some Math on Debbie Wasserman-Schultz”

  1. Stand Back! He’s Going To Try Math! « A Conservative Wanderer says:

    [...] Shack has done the unthinkable-well, unthinkable to Obamacrats, at least-he’s applied math to some of Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s pronouncements: Let me say that again. This administration has spent over one and one-quarter million dollars per [...]

  2. Hobbitt von Tripp says:

    "Quantitive Easing I and II" Thats well over a trillion you can add to their total.

    Cost of all the new regulations. Cost of just flat shutting things down. Let the Democrats have all the credit they have earned.

    • Jimmie says:

      I didn’t add in the Fed moves (which also included the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailouts) and, with my resources, I can’t quantify how much the regulations cost. I only added in the numbers I could get on my own, in about an hour of research.

  3. [...] The alternative — spending our way to prosperity — has been a miserable failure that has cost us and our children over $3 billion and “saved or created” jobs as a stunning million dollars a pop. One of the big [...]

  4. [...] Economic Chart of the Day and Tom Coburn’s Puzzling PlansWhen we conservatives said that the President’s big government madness were sucking job-producing dollars out of the economy, even before we feel the full effects of [...]

Leave a Reply

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 characters available