Perry Waited 10 Years to Cut Spending – Sorry, Rick, Presidents Can Only Serve 8 Years

Rick Perry jumped into the field last Saturday waving his ten years of experience as governor of Texas proudly in the air.

If the Republican field were complete at this time and consisted only of a bunch of RINOs with Rick Perry as the only Conservative, conservatives would obviously support him as the candidate closest to their camp.

However, although Perry might not like it, this is far from the current scenario. Palin, who has close to a decade of executive experience including her time as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission chairwoman, and governor of Alaska, will likely be joining the race within the next month or two. Besides the fact that she will overshadow him and the rest of the field, Palin will bump Perry from “the most conservative” candidate to the second or third seat.

With the downgrading of our credit rating the entire country was shaken out of its slumber and the number-one priority for all Americans is once again the economy. The candidates will thus have to prove their prowess to the public.

Although Rick Perry is selling himself as a through and through conservative especially fiscally, and has begun to tout his alliance to the Tea Party, the facts show otherwise.

Perry has served as the governor of Texas for over a decade with the overall spending increasing ever since he took office in December 2000 up until the current fiscal year of 2011 at an average of 16.8 percent every two years. Even after adjusting the figures in consideration of population growth and inflation, spending has still increased by 4.2 percent every two years Perry governed.

Suddenly, after an entire decade of increased budgets, and with a presidential bid looming in the horizon, Perry found it necessary to reign in the spending slightly in an attempt to get the economy into some semblance of control. He announced with great pomp that the upcoming two fiscal budgets will be smaller than the current one. Hey, I know Obama always talks about what will take place ten years down the road, but in reality the presidential term is only four years long with a maximum of two terms. Waiting ten years in order to take action is a red flag on a resume for a potential presidential candidate. Such behavior should be unacceptable.

In direct comparison, during Perry’s growth of debt, Palin defeated the corrupt Murkowski and in less than three years cut spending, reduced future debt, and created policies which spurred tremendous growth in the private sector.

When faced with Perry vs. Palin the choice should be obvious. Yes, Texas is far more populated and has a larger economy than Alaska, but you know what? Many small business owners are successfully turning in a profit year after year, while quite a few multi-billion dollar corporations such as GM are heavily in debt with their executives clueless in how to turn things around. Perry may be the one governing the larger state, but his record doesn’t seem to be the more impressive of the two. Palin has led first Wasilla and then Alaska with business acumen, stopping frivolous spending. The economy boomed under her watch, yet she made sure to spend wisely and plan for the future.

Palin CUT spending during her years as Governor of Alaska. The budget of 2010 was 9.5% lower than the budget of 2007 and a decrease of 16.8% from 2009! These figures don’t include inflation or population increases which only make her accomplishments so much greater.

Under Perry’s watch, federal funds amounted to approximately a third of Texas’s state’s budget for the last decade.

On the other hand, Palin slashed the federal funding for the state of Alaska in three years by 80 percent! For the fiscal year of 2007, Governor Murkowski had requested and received federal funding for 63 projects to the tune of $349,497,000. In 2010, for FY2010, Governor Palin’s federal funding requested and received was a mere $69,100,000 for only 8 projects!

And although most of you probably saw the PA4Palin article Whitney re-posted, now that Perry officially joined the race it’s worth repeating.

During Sarah Palin’s governorship (December 2006 – July 2009)

• Alaska ranked 2nd in the nation for job growth.

• Alaska ranked 3rd in the nation for change in the unemployment rate relative to the national average.

During Rick Perry’s governorship (December 2000 – May 2011)

• Texas ranked 4th in the nation for job growth.

• Texas ranked 23rd in the nation for change in the unemployment rate relative to the national average.

One more interesting tidbit: Texas and Alaska both don’t collect personal income tax, although Texas makes up for it by having the tenth highest sales tax at 6.25% while Alaska is one of only two states which collects neither personal income tax nor sales tax.

As Palin had said in Iowa last week, she’d support ABO (Anyone but Obama) – and Perry is definitely a better alternative than Obama. However, Perry’s record is still a far cry from the fiscally prudent conservative whose mask he’s recently donned, especially in comparison to Governor Palin’s record. Palin’s gubernatorial record is proof of her ability to prioritize expenses, shave away all wasteful programs, and turn a lack of cash to an overflow of funds.

Conservatives, after discovering the facts, will turn to Palin to unseat Obama and stop the reckless spending.