Palin's Record on Debt and Liabilities Bests the Rest of the GOP Field

Pennsylvania4Palin ^ | steebo77

[Anamnesis]

Of all current or former governors among the leading candidates for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, no one’s record of dealing with his or her state’s debt and unfunded liabilities compares with that of Sarah Palin during her three fiscal years at the helm in Alaska.

The following analysis examines the growth of total debt outstanding and total liabilities, both on an actual and per capita basis, for Alaska under Sarah Palin, Massachusetts under Mitt Romney, Minnesota under Tim Pawlenty, Texas under Rick Perry, and Utah under Jon Huntsman.

Total Debt Outstanding

Of the five governorships examined, Alaska under Palin saw the smallest increase in total debt outstanding (12.7% cumulatively, 4.2% per year). Texas under Perry performed worst, with total debt increasing 20.5% annually, almost tripling during his term (a cumulative increase of 184.2%).

On a per capita basis, only Utah under Huntsman performed slightly better than Alaska under Palin. Utah experienced a cumulative increase of 6.8%, versus 7.4% for Alaska (1.4% per year for Utah, versus 2.5% per year for Alaska). Again, Texas under Perry ranks last, with an astonishing cumulative increase in debt per capita of 140.4% (15.6% on an annual basis).

Candidate	Beginning Debt Outstanding	Ending Debt Outstanding	Cumulative Increase/Decrease	Average Annual Increase/Decrease
Palin FY07 – FY10	$2.246 Billion	$2.531 Billion	12.7%	4.2%
Huntsman FY05 – FY10	$3.475 Billion	$4.204 Billion	21.0%	4.2%
Pawlenty FY03 – FY10	$3.474 Billion	$5.768 Billion	66.0%	9.4%
Romney FY03 – FY07	$15.963 Billion	$23.026 Billion	44.3%	11.1%
Perry FY01 – FY10	$12.561 Billion	$35.692 Billion	184.2%	20.5%

Candidate	Beginning Debt Outstanding Per Capita	Ending Debt Outstanding Per Capita	Cumulative Increase/Decrease	Average Annual Increase/Decrease
Huntsman FY05 – FY10	$1,391	$1,485	6.8%	1.4%
Palin FY07 – FY10	$3,326	$3,571	7.4%	2.5%
Pawlenty FY03 – FY10	$688	$1,090	58.5%	8.4%
Romney FY03 – FY07	$2,473	$3,543	43.3%	10.8%
Perry FY01 – FY10	$589	$1,416	140.4%	15.6%

Cumulative Change in Debt Outstanding During Governorship

Average Annual Change in Debt Outstanding During Governorship

Total Liabilities

Alaska under Palin was the only state to see a reduction in total liabilities (34.6% overall, 11.5% per year), due in large part to the Governor’s insistence that the State’s surplus be used to pay down unfunded pension obligations and forward-fund education. All other states experienced cumulative increases in total liabilities, ranging from 19.5% for Massachusetts under Romney to 60.6% for Texas under Perry. On an annualized basis, other states showed increases ranging from 4.9% for Massachusetts under Romney to 8.2% for Utah under Huntsman.

Under Palin, Alaska’s total liabilities per capita fell 37.7% (12.6% per year). All other states experienced cumulative increases, ranging between 18.7% (Massachusetts) and 34.3% (Minnesota), and annual increases, averaging between 4.0% (Texas) and 4.9% (Minnesota and Utah).

Candidate	Beginning Total Liabilities	Ending Total Liabilities	Cumulative Increase/Decrease	Average Annual Increase/Decrease
Palin FY07 – FY10	$9.847 Billion	$6.436 Billion	-34.6%	-11.5%
Romney FY03 – FY07	$37.679 Billion	$45.030 Billion	19.5%	4.9%
Pawlenty FY03 – FY10	$10.188 Billion	$14.366 Billion	40.7%	5.8%
Perry FY01 – FY10	$48.125 Billion	$77.271 Billion	60.6%	6.7%
Huntsman FY05 – FY10	$4.501 Billion	$6.351 Billion	41.4%	8.2%

Candidate	Beginning Total Liabilities Per Capita	Ending Total Liabilities Per Capita	Cumulative Increase/Decrease	Average Annual Increase/Decrease
Palin FY07 – FY10	$14,581	$9,079	-37.7%	-12.6%
Perry FY01 – FY10	$2,256	$3,065	35.8%	4.0%
Romney FY03 – FY07	$5,837	$6,928	18.7%	4.7%
Huntsman FY05 – FY10	$1,801	$2,244	24.5%	4.9%
Pawlenty FY03 – FY10	$2,017	$2,710	34.3%	4.9%

Cumulative Change in Total Liabilities During Governorship

Average Annual Change in Total Liabilities During Governorship

Summary

During the fiscal years for which Sarah Palin exercised budgetary authority as Governor of Alaska (FY08 through FY10)

•   Debt outstanding increased 12.7%, or 4.2% per year

•   Per capita debt outstanding increased 7.4%, or 2.5% per year

•   Total liabilities decreased 34.6%, or 11.5% per year

•   Total liabilities per capita decreased 37.7%, or 12.6% per year

During the fiscal years for which Jon Huntsman exercised budgetary authority as Governor of Utah (FY06 through FY10)

•   Debt outstanding increased 21.0%, or 4.2% per year

•   Per capita debt outstanding increased 6.8%, or 1.4% per year

•   Total liabilities increased 41.1%, or 8.2% per year

•   Total liabilities per capita increased 24.5%, or 4.9% per year

During the fiscal years for which Tim Pawlenty exercised budgetary authority as Governor of Minnesota (FY04 through FY10)

•   Debt outstanding increased 66.0%, or 9.4% per year

•   Per capita debt outstanding increased 58.5%, or 8.4% per year

•   Total liabilities increased 40.7%, or 5.8% per year

•   Total liabilities per capita increased 34.3%, or 4.9% per year

During the fiscal years for which Mitt Romney exercised budgetary authority as Governor of Massachusetts (FY04 through FY07)

•   Debt outstanding increased 44.3%, or 11.1% per year

•   Per capita debt outstanding increased 43.3%, or 10.8% per year

•   Total liabilities increased 19.5%, or 4.9% per year

•   Total liabilities per capita increased 18.7%, or 4.7% per year

During the fiscal years for which Rick Perry exercised budgetary authority as Governor of Texas (FY02 through FY10)

•   Debt outstanding increased 184.2%, or 20.5% per year

•   Per capita debt outstanding increased 140.4%, or 15.6% per year

•   Total liabilities increased 60.6%, or 6.7% per year

•   Total liabilities per capita increased 35.8%, or 4.0% per year

Sources:

Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports

State of Alaska

Fiscal Year July 1, 2006 – June 30, 2007

Fiscal Year July 1, 2009 – June 30, 2010

Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2003

Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2007

State of Minnesota

Year Ended June 30, 2003

Year Ended June 30, 2010

State of Texas

Fiscal Year Ending August 31, 2001

Fiscal Year Ending August 31, 2010

State of Utah

Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2005

Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010

Population Figures

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census

Preliminary Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico : April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2010

[steebo77]

The comparisons are not apples to oranges. I calculated the numbers on a per capita basis (to correct for population size) and on an average annual basis (to correct for length of time in office). Palin still comes out on top. And Perry lands at the bottom of the heap. Try again, and try harder.

[steebo77]

Even though she was in office from December 2006 through July 2009, Palin’s governorship covers fiscal years 2008 (July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2008) through 2010 (July 1, 2009 - June 30, 2010), because those are the years covered by the budgets over which she presided.

[Gargantua]

I believe the Ridgerunner is simply evincing that he is capable of making the clear distinction between Palin's classy treatment of Perry (ever the fine lady that she is), and the way her record kicks the steaming sh*t out of his six ways from Sunday.

Apparently a distinction which is lost on you. Don't feel bad, though. Imagine how truly boring this life would be if everyone were average intelligence or above.

;^D

[peyton randolph]

Before lumping me in with the Palin-haters, read Comment #13.

To be critical of flawed reasons given for supporting a candidate doesn't mean one opposes that candidate. You're both jumping off the deep end into the "Pitchfork Pat" true believers schtick that infected FR when Buchanan ran for President. Someone would post a bogus straw poll that showed Buchanan winning the presidency and anyone critical of the poll's results was branded a Buchanan-hater, RINO, etc. Same cr@p done by Ron Paul's supporters every time he runs.

As noted in #13, there's a good chance I'll vote for Palin in the primaries if she runs.

But getting attacked by "purists" for pointing out flaws in arguments on her behalf does nothing to encourage such a vote. Frankly, it reminds me of the whackos who vote to re-elect Dennis Kucinich to Congress not because ideology but because they share his beliefs in UFOs.

A decade holding a weak governorship of a large state doesn't give the governor credit for the economy in that state. Similarly, a partial term as a strong governor in a state with a population the size of Austin doesn't provide sufficient reason to claim she's Reagan reincarnated either. Palin and Perry are the best the GOP has to offer if they run...but understand that both are more populist than conservative. Either will disappoint conservatives at times as President because of that populist streak. But each is superior to the Marxist currently occupying the Oval Office.

You can vote for the "right" candidate for the wrong reasons...just don't insist everyone else has to as well.  The chart is fundamentally flawed for the reasons pointed out.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

So, ridgerunner, go sit back down in your corner, close your eyes real tight and keep whispering. 'please Sarah, please be my girlfriend!'.

She's already your girlfriend...

"If the 'savants' here at FR would have applied their idiotic litmus test to Reagan he would have 'failed'. I've come to the irrefutable conclusion that those who begrudge Palin appear to have little use for logic or even common sense. If their desires were realized conservatives, along with the GOP, would be a permanent minority in the U.S. Congress."

[Syncro]

Imagine how truly boring this life would be if everyone were average intelligence or above.

LOL, a right on ZINGER!

[Gargantua]

"To be critical of flawed reasons given for supporting a candidate doesn't mean one opposes that candidate."

I never said it did. Nor did I ever accuse you of being "anti-Palin." I commented only, and quite pointedly, upon your misinterpretation of the empirical Palin data and how it juxtaposes to Perry's.

"You're both jumping off the deep end..."

Ahem... from whence it came, Cyrano.

%)

[Sun]

>>>>“I get frustrated with folks from outside Alaska who come up and say you shouldn’t develop your resources,” she says. Alaska needs to be self-sufficient, she says, instead of relying heavily on “federal dollars,” as the state does today.

more http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/851orcjq.asp?page=2

Palin didn’t want Fed. dollars - she wanted Alaska to be allowed to drill baby, drill!!>>>>

“Alaska is a welfare state, receiving almost twice as much money from the feds as it pays. So, tell us, in which year of her self-abbreviated tenure did she reject the welfare from the feds.”

Did you REALLY expect Palin to change the Feds’ actions as governor? As POTUS, she can, and so can Bachmann, Santorum and Cain. As gov., Palin was at the mercy of the feds. to some extent. The feds won’t allow Alaska to drill.

TX is allowed to drill more than Alaska, but if Perry were gov. of Alaska, he would not have done as well as Palin, including the fact that Palin got rid of corruption in her own party.

[Sun]

Do you actually think Perry would have done as well with Alaska, as Palin did, given the same set of circumstances that Palin had?

Palin is more of a constitutional conservative, and would not want to be a nanny-state leader, as Perry was with his mandated vaccines for girls, as young as nine years of age.

btw, how is Perry doing with securing Texas borders? Or is he more like Bush in that area?

[Sun]

“The Feds should be paying Alaska rent on all the land they control.”

Well said!!!!

We need a POTUS as tough as Palin (and a few others) so we can use the natural resources that our Creator has blessed us with.

[deport]

The feds won’t allow Alaska to drill.

---

Possibly but are they stopping AK from drilling on the state owned lands. I can understand the Feds controlling drilling in the almost 70% of the land in AK that they own/control.

[CharlesWayneCT]

I can see how that works out to three years of budgets; I guess it’s just that “2007-2010” sounds like 4 calendar years; in fiscal years, it should say “2007-2009”.

Virginia is interesting because we have 2-year budgets, so our off-year legislative sessions are “short” sessions, and just tweak the budgets rather than writing new ones.

[tomkat]

[normy]

That is a joke and you're a joke if your don't see the difference or refuse to see it.

[normy]

Palin is a welfare state governor. Bottom line. She receives almost 2-1 federal dollars.

[Sun]

“and you’re a joke”

Tsk, tsk. So you can’t respond to my comment so you name call.

[TruthConquers]

FYI

“The Liberals need hatred and lies to justify their disliking Palin. Other than a purely irrational vitriol with which they parrot lies and distortions about her (which often go unchallenged just because they are so forcefully expressed), they would not be able to point to any one substantive reason for disliking her.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2742043/posts?page=31#31s

[wtc911]

None of what you posted changes the fact that Alaska is a welfare state getting almost twice as much from the fed as it puts in.

[Sun]

Just don’t blame Palin. Blame the Federal Govt..

We need a president in the White House to change things, and allow as much drilling as we need, in Alaska, and throughout the country. You’ll see more jobs, less govt. hand outs, as well as lower gasoline and heating oil prices.

What we need in the White House is a president, who fights like a girl, and that would be Palin or Bachmann.