It's all a con game, a scam, another way to accuse the opposition of mishandling money and misleading the public. Today, right now, the democrats are accusing the Bush Administration of causing predicted deficits. They are claiming that his $1.35 trillion income tax cut over ten years will cause deficits, something they would like you to believe is as evil as communism.

But these deficits are only in the "on budget" figures. And even by their own terms, it isn't something for the future, it has already happened.

Here's the truth.

In fiscal 2001 that ended on September 30 the US Treasury posted a surplus of $127.2 billion. The second largest surplus ever enjoyed by this country. However, the "on budget" revenue and expenditures were in the hole with a deficit of minus $33.5 billion, no small amount.

So, how did we get a surplus? Simple. The "off budget"revenue and expenditures were in surplus $160.7 billion. Subtract $33.5 billion from $160.7 billion and you've got a "unified budget" surplus of $127.2 billion.

If that isn't clear enough for you, here's a table to illustrate it:

This does not mean that at the end of the fiscal year the government had a huge pile of money to dive into and play with like Scrooge McDuck. This extra or surplus money was spent as fast as it came in. There's nothing left. And the "surplus" pertains only to the amount of extra money that they had to spend after going through everything allocated in the 2001 budget hassled over and finally approved by Congress hopefully before the fiscal year started.

The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 dealt solely with balancing the "unified" budget and should have been titled The Balanced Unified Budget Act of 1997. After years of debate, the year 2002 was chosen as the year when "off budget" receipts would be enough to equal any deficit ever run by honestly borrowing money from the public; i.e., running a true deficit.

"Off budget" money comes strictly from extra money collected by entitlements like Social Security ($98.7 billion), Medicare, gas taxes, airports and airways, unemployment taxes and about a dozen others making up the remaining $62 billion surplus during the last fiscal year. It's money that is not supposed to be spent elsewhere, but has been stolen by the Beltway Bandits for ages. It's money that they have come to believe is their own, belongs to them, and that they can do with as they please.

"On budget" money comes from individual income and corporate taxes, with minor amounts from estate and excise taxes. When this category runs a deficit, it means that the government spent more money than intended in the approved annual budget.

There are two ways the government can make up for an "on budget" deficit. The honest way is to borrow from the public by offering new (not simply replacement) bonds, bills, notes or Treasury securities on the open market. The other, dishonest method, is to steal the money from entitlement surpluses. Guess which method our crafty politicians and bureaucrats employ.

The attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center probably accounted for some of the "on budget" deficit of fiscal 2001, but since this occurred only three weeks from the close of the fiscal year it's doubtful very much accounts for the $33.5 billion deficit. Expenses for the ensuing war are estimated at $1 billion per month or $12 billion for the year. Helping airlines, insurance companies, and others effected by this tragedy might account for more, but it still looks like what the democrats are complaining about is the loss of some of their slush fund pork barrel money and only $66 billion paid against the national debt during fiscal 2001, their debt laundering operation.

With a surplus of $127.2 billion and only $66 billion paid against the national debt, that means that the government overspent $61.2 billion. Add on the $33.5 billion "on budget" deficit that they made up from entitlements and you've got a total of $94.7 billion in overspending for fiscal 2001.

Strangely, the federal government opens its fiscal year on October 1st instead of on January 1st following the calendar year. It's not uncommon for organizations to set their fiscal year wherever advantageous, but in an elected body it doesn't make much sense. Three months of fiscal 2001, one entire quarter, were under the Clinton Administration and the Clinton budget for 2001 approved by Congress. It really isn't fair to blame Bush for an annual budget he had nothing at all to do with. Democrats forget this.

You can't believe any of the numbers you hear quoted in the news media or from politicians. All of them seem to deal with second-hand information and hearsay. They could go to the source just as you could. The US Treasury is just like your local bank only larger. It does a pretty good job of detailing expenses and receipts. If you want to know where the government's money comes from and where it goes, the Treasury is your only reliable source.

You can follow, reference, and double check the Treasury's numbers with direct links at the Taxpayers Union for Financial Freedom (TUFF) pages at: http://www.get-tuff.com/Miscellaneous/numbers.html