Well written, but more like fiction. Do some research first. If Clinton had been allowed to do everything he and Hillary wanted to do, we would have had this meltdown years ago.

Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.

While not defending the increase of the federal debt under President Bush, It is curious to see Clinton's record promoted as having generated a surplus. It never happened. article by Craig Steiner, discusses the hard facts about the national debt. There was never a surplus and the facts support that position. In fact, far from a $360 billion reduction in the national debt in FY1998-FY2000, there was an increase of $281 billion.

Verifying this is as simple as accessing the U.S. Treasury website where the national debt is updated daily and a history of the debt since January 1993 can be obtained. Considering the government's fiscal year ends on the last day of September each year, and considering Clinton's budget proposal in 1993 took effect in October 1993 and concluded September 1994 (FY1994), here's the national debt at the end of each year of Clinton Budgets:
Ending National Debt Deficit
FY1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion

As can clearly be seen, in no year did the national debt go down, nor did Clinton leave President Bush with a surplus that Bush subsequently turned into a deficit. Clinton clearly did not achieve a surplus and he didn't leave President Bush with a surplus.

So why do they say he had a surplus? As is usually the case in claims such as this, it has to do with Washington doublespeak and political smoke and mirrors. The reality is that the federal government and politicians use a form of accounting that would get most accountants thrown in jail. The only debt that matters is the total national debt. You can have a surplus and a debt at the same time, but you can't have a surplus if the amount of debt is going up each year. And the national debt went up every single year under Clinton. The U.S. Treasury's historical record of the national debt verifies this. A balanced budget or a budget surplus is a great thing, but it's only relevant if the budget surplus turns into a real surplus at the end of the fiscal year. In Clinton's case, it never did.

If you are interested in more research on this topic see http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16

Yes, they did. That was well written, Jim.