Here's a fun game called "Spot the Fiscal Conservative."
Three of the four major Republican candidates for president would add trillions to the national debt with their tax policies, according to an independent analysis by U.S. Budget Watch. The fourth candidate would cut $2 trillion from future borrowing. Can you guess which three call themselves "fiscal conservatives"?
Texas Rep. Ron Paul pairs big tax cuts with even bigger spending cuts, actually reducing future debt by about $2 trillion.
Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum and former House speaker Newt Gingrich would pile trillions onto the debt. They propose sharp tax cuts without identifying where the money comes from. It's like buying a Ferrari on your credit card and calling yourself "financially responsible" because you negotiated 0.9% APR.
The Numbers
By 2021, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget:
- Santorum's plan: +$4.5 trillion in debt
- Gingrich's plan: +$7 trillion in debt
- Romney's plan: +$2.6 trillion in debt
- Paul's plan: -$2 trillion in debt
Graph Source: http://crfb.org/
Gingrich and Santorum would push debt held by outside investors to over 100% of GDP. That's the financial equivalent of owing more on your credit cards than you earn in a year. Banks call this "a problem." Economists call it "unsustainable." I call it "notable."
Romney: The Moderate Spender
Romney started with $1.35 trillion in tax cuts paired with $1.2 trillion in spending cuts. Close enough, right? Like being "only a little pregnant."
Then Wednesday happened. Romney proposed cutting all federal income tax rates by an additional 20%. This would slash revenue by over $2 trillion over 10 years.
His economic adviser Glenn Hubbard said they'd recover the lost cash by "closing tax loopholes and boosting economic activity." Which loopholes? How much activity? These questions remain theoretical.
Paul: Actual Math
Paul would cut tax revenue by $5 trillion over the next decade. He'd also cut spending by $7 trillion, including deep reductions in defense and federal health programs.
The math works if you don't mind actually cutting things. Most politicians prefer the "cut taxes, promise to cut spending later" approach. It polls better than honesty.
Paul campaign spokesman Gary Howard: "It's not a surprise to us the report found that Congressman Paul's plan is the only one that doesn't raise the debt. The critical importance of dealing with our growing debt has been a hallmark issue of Dr. Paul's campaign and his career."
The Responses
Romney spokesperson Andrea Saul argued that Romney is the only candidate to lay out a realistic budget framework "that will jump-start the American economy and bring tax relief to middle-income Americans."
The report's authors gave each candidate three scenarios: low-debt (most generous assumptions), intermediate-debt (reasonable assumptions), and high-debt (stringent assumptions). The numbers above use the intermediate scenario, which gives candidates credit for vague promises like "reduce spending by X%."
Even with generous assumptions, the math remains third-grade arithmetic. Three candidates want to collect less money and spend the same amount. One candidate wants to collect less money and spend less money. The confusion is notable.
By Lori Montgomery, Published: February 23 The Washington Post
Comments