By Ed Rogers August 4 at 6:24 PM

With the frightening calamities overseas growing with menacing momentum and all the shallow and cynical talk about gridlock and impeachment here at home, it is easy to get distracted from what will really matter to voters less than 100 days from now, when they go to the polls for the 2014 midterm elections.

There is no chance the economy will be strong by November, even if we see some improvements between now and then. The real questions are how weak it will still be and to what degree voters will want to send a message that they are unhappy with the Democrats’ stewardship of the economy.

Obama apologists will point to the most recent quarter of gross domestic product growth as evidence that the economy is improving. Well, even the boost from this one quarter of good growth under President Obama – which is still subject to revision – means that GDP growth for the year is now an anemic 0.9 percent.

One lesson to derive from the Obama administration is that not all growth represents good policy.  To achieve the paltry growth we have seen in the past five years, Obama has resorted to economic steroids in the form of federal bond-buying programs and worse, economic meth in the form of debt. Obama has increased our country’s debt by more than any other president in history. Think about that. Since he was first elected, Obama has overspent by more than $1 trillion per year (on average), resulting in a total of $7.1 trillion added to the national debt under his watch so far.

In other words, thus far the Obama administration has added over $61,000 per American household to our national debt.

In a campaign, it is difficult to talk about abstract “trillion dollar deficits” and dollars per household, but there is an easy question Republican candidates should pose to voters.  They should ask, “Do you think you’re getting your money’s worth from the government?”  That is, do voters feel that the extra $61,000 the Obama administration has spent above and beyond the federal budget has resulted in additional, tangible benefits for their families?