>Clinton paid on the debt.
labeling that as "Clinton" is a bit much.
Neither Clinton nor the Republican Congress provoked by his first two years could have done it without the other.
Republicans proposed balancing in eight (?) years in the "Contract with America." Clinton called it "reckless."
Then, after they won, Clinton proposed a year less.
They saw that year, and raised him another.
The collapse in interest rates, largely caused by the drop in present and future borrowing, knocked about another year off.
It was a *good* result from political competition, and they actually worked together. We really haven't seen anything comparable since. (there was some precedent in Reagan and Tip O'Neil working together, but that didn't reach *this* level).
Now, if most of the members of the house would realize that if they simply ostracized the Dingbat Caucus on the left, and the Arson Caucus on the right, and put aside voting purely from party discipline, they'd realizer that they have 70-80% in the middle that could, well, *govern* instead of voting against their own agenda when the other party proposes it . . .
[ok, time to wake up]
hawk