Policy Memo: What Independent Analysts are Saying about the Kerry Budget

George W. Bush ^ | October 8, 2004

[RWR8189]

MEMORANDUM
FROM: BC'04 POLICY DEPARTMENT

Introduction

Over the course of the campaign, Senator Kerry has proposed adding more than $2 trillion in new spending to the Federal budget, including his big government take over of health care.  Yet he still claims he will reduce the budget deficit in half during his first term.  Contrary to his claim, third party analysis indicates Senator Kerry underestimates the costs of his proposals and inflates the value of his offsets.  Independent analysts conclude Senator Kerry's numbers just don't add up.  In order to maintain his pledge to cut the deficit in half he will either have to abandon most of his campaign promises, raise middle class taxes or both.

CLICK HERE TO SEE CHART

Think Tanks Estimate Senator Kerry's Proposals Would Explode The Budget Deficit

Despite Senator Kerry's claim to pay for each of his policy proposals, outside groups find he would add as much as $2.5 trillion to the budget deficit over the next ten years.  Although Senator Kerry pledges to raise taxes by more than $600 billion, he still spends $3 for every $1 he collects from higher taxes.

• The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) Indicates Budget Deficit would explode under Kerry. "Even with that generous accounting, the Kerry spending promises add up to an extraordinary amount of money. Our best estimate is that Kerry's proposals will add up to between $2 trillion and $2.1 trillion over the next ten years. Since the revenue from his tax proposals relative to the current baseline is actually negative, this implies that the Kerry proposal would increase the deficit by perhaps as much as $2.5 trillion over the next ten years." (Source: "EXCLUSIVE: The Kerry Campaign's Funny Math," Tech Central Station, http://www.techcentralstation.com/081304C.html,  8/13/04)
  
  
• National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF) study Says Senator Kerry's Spending Plans would Mean Higher Taxes, a Larger National Debt or Both. "Despite Kerry's attempts to outflank Bush on the deficit issue and portray himself as the more fiscally responsible candidate, the data behind Kerry's rhetoric tell a different story," said NTUF Policy Analyst and study author Drew Johnson. "Enactment of Kerry's 'revised' spending agenda in its entirety would still mean higher taxes, a larger national debt, or likely both…… By exempting a series of major discretionary categories, Kerry's so-called 'strong' spending caps are actually so porous as to be no more effective than the restraints George W. Bush has sought," Johnson concluded. "In the final analysis, the 'winner' of the 2004 election could very well be the federal deficit -- leaving taxpayers with a landslide loss of their economic freedom." (Source: "Study: Kerry's Fiscal Agenda "Makeover" Won't Improve Budget Picture for Taxpayers," NTUF, http://www.ntu.org/main/press_release.php?PressID=629&org_name=NTUF, 7/12/04)
  
  
• The Heritage Foundation Concludes Kerry's Plan would Raise Deficits. "Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's current tax and spending proposals would actually increase the budget deficit, despite his promise that, if elected, he would cut the budget deficit in half by 2008.  A rosy estimate that, whenever possible, uses the Kerry campaign's own budget estimates reveals a 2008 budget deficit of $443 billion, which is $232 billion higher than the campaign's target.  A skeptical estimate based on third-party cost projections reveals a 2008 budget deficit of $525 billion. Unless he scales back his ambitious spending plans, Senator Kerry would need to raise taxes by between $2,090 and $2,829 per household--on top of his current proposed tax increases—in order to fulfill his deficit reduction pledge.  Senator Kerry's budget proposals ignore the mountain of impending entitlement debt that, if left unreformed, will dwarf any achievable savings."  (Source: "Would Senator Kerry's Budget Really Reduce the Deficit?" Heritage Foundation, 9/21/04)

[HardStarboard]

I heard some Kerry campaign twerp talking about his healthcare proposal. They estimate that they will save 3/4 of the cost of the system by....get this now....

by instituting a Government sponsored computer system to automate all medical record keeping and claims - in the whole nation.

Well, I spent a career in computer systems and the US government is absolutely terrible at instituting systems.

Witness - FAA air traffic control system has slid its moderization program schedule for 2 or 3 years each of 4 times.

Witness - IRS system/every IRS examiner was supposed to use laptops to communicate updated returns and investigation activity to headquarters.....not happening. The plan was started 6 years ago.

Witness - FBI= this one really hurts but if they had had a system more modern than the archaic one they now have, we might have connected the 911 dots on 910!

And now the government is supposed to develop a medical records/claims system for the whole nation and save money? 2/3 of 850 Billion?

Give Me A Break John