Mitt Romney's budget plan is, at a certain level, kind of amusing, at least in a macabre sort of way. The Republican presidential hopeful seriously believes -- or least wants you to seriously believe -- that he can slash taxes, increase defense spending, and balance the budget simultaneously. You'd think with his vast fortune, Romney could have bought a calculator by now.
Ezra Klein calls the GOP candidate's plan "a fantasy." That's certainly true, but it's the kind of fantasy that I find curious. From Ezra's piece:
Consider what Romney has promised. By 2016, he says federal spending will be below 20 percent of GDP, and at least 4 percent of that will be defense spending. At that point, he will cap federal spending at 20 percent of GDP, meaning it can never rise above that level.
All that's hard enough. Romney will have to cut federal spending by between $6 and $7 trillion over the next decade to hit those targets. As my colleague Suzy Khimm has detailed, those budget promises already require cuts far in excess of what even Paul Ryan's budget proposes.
But Ryan's budget includes more than $700 billion in Medicare cuts over the next decade, Romney's budget won't. And Romney promises that there will be no other changes to Social Security or Medicare for those over 55, which means neither program can be cut for the next 10 years.
Right, Romney's "plan" is transparently silly. It'd be foolish enough to think he could eliminate the deficit while walling off more than half the federal budget, but the Republican candidate actually goes further -- he not only intends to shield the Pentagon and entitlements from cuts; he's going to spend more money on them, while also passing a massive tax break.
To make the arithmetic work, Romney would have to make enormous cuts to public investments in every other part of government, including everything from law enforcement to infrastructure, education to medical research, food safety to immigration.
Politically, this would be insane. Indeed, the plan is quite literally unbelievable. It's why Ezra followed up on Twitter with a good question: "Does anyone really, truly think that he'll push these much more severe, unpopular cuts when in office?"
Perhaps not. But that leads to a related concern that turns Campaign Politics 101 on its head: Romney is striving for extremism before the election, not after.
Look again at the picture Ezra painted: according to Romney's own promises, a vote for him is a vote for a wildly unpopular series of budget moves. If voters were aware of the fact that Romney were proposing deep cuts to law enforcement, infrastructure, education, medical research, food safety, and immigration, while also giving the wealthy a ginormous tax break, he'd probably lose nearly every state.
But therein lies the point. Common sense suggests candidates -- in either party, in any cycle -- would run a general-election campaign promising relative moderation. Maybe after the election the candidates might propose measures the American mainstream doesn't like, but sane contenders don't want the electorate to perceive them as radical.
And yet, here we are. "Does anyone really, truly think that he'll push these much more severe, unpopular cuts when in office?" It seems hard to believe. But I also wonder if anyone can explain why he's pushing these severe, unpopular cuts before he gets to office.
Leave a Comment:
In the absence of a plan that can be scored by the CBO, Romney has endorsed the Ryan Plan and will try to enact its provisions. He has said as much.
The burden is on him.
Fortunately for the Romney/Ryan ticket, Americans are not good at math. For example, most are mystified by the 1066 short form, which requires limited writing skills, and even less arithmetic. (Stock tip: buy some H&R Block.)
I personally have amassed a small fortune by holding a five dollar bill in my hand, and asking strangers if they have two tens for a five.
Form 1066?? Maybe you believe REMICs (Real-Estate Mortgage Interest Conduits) are "people too, my friend" but they don't have the vote.
"I . . . wonder if anyone can explain why he's pushing these severe, unpopular cuts before he gets to office."
I don't think your premise is correct. The Romney campaign has announced a a set of aspirations, and it calls them, collectively, a "plan." Those aspirations do not include cuts to popular programs. Your piece points out that failure to include those cuts makes the other aspirations mathematically impossible. But Romney simply ignores that fact; that is, he denies that his plan is as radical as the arithmetic makes it.
George W. Bush ran on a similar platform in 2000. Bush used to take 4 dollar bills, which he said represented the budgent surplus (remember that?), and he said he'd use one for new spending, one for social security and medicare and one for his tax cut, etc. The problem was that the actual numbers didn't add up: Given the size of the tax cut and his military expenditures, Bush was actually promising to use the same dollar twice. Paul Krugman pointed this out on almost a weekly basis, and the Gore campaign eventually put it into a commercial, but the rest of the world ignored it.
This is not to say that your critique of Romney's "plan" is wrong. But because Gov. Romney does not accept the validity of your calculations, he denies that his "plan" is as radical as it actually is.
I would take it further. Romney/Ryan/Republicans (RRRs) have long put forth the idea that budget deficits and the national debt are the huge problem with democratic spending. The Tea Party pushed the RRRs to make this the core argument of their campaigns, even though they still want to convert America into a theocracy, the RRRs are using the debt issue as their new social wedge issue. It is immoral and unChristian to "redistribute wealth".
These budget takes that wedge issue and does what RRRs are doing these days, lie about it. He says he can cut taxes, reduces the deficit, increase defense spending, build a wall and keeping immigrants out, and keep all the programs that you care about. That sounds great, not extreme at all (except extremely awesome). So you ask how? "Well by using my knowledge of job creating success in the private sector." To do what? "Cut taxes, reduce the deficit, etc..." So it becomes a loop of lies. And just like with Romney's tax forms, he will count on their being enough dustups about some liberal saying something that can be attacked that the media will be distracted and will create those false equivalacies and the public will never get the answers to those questions.
If they get enough people preaching in enough places and raise just enough questions about the Obama facts that the media focuses equally on the question of the possibility that liberals have said something that may be based on independent projections that may be inncorrect, then the word won't get out about their lies because the media doesn't talk about them long enough for them to become common knowledge.
Maybe Romney bought a magical calculator that will make the numbers work.
If he's wrong all he has to do is shake it a little bit to start over
He plans to ravage the government as if still working for Bain and let the Federal government clean up the mess. Oh wait.
One of Romney's goal's is to start a couple of war's and push as many tax break's as he can through in four yrs.to benefit himself, his family and his wealthy friend's.Then he can hand off his mess to the next president.That took Bush 8 yrs.But Romney think's he can do it in half the time.
The Romney campaign is going with the idea that enough money will buy the election. Tell the big donors what they want to hear. Pick the conservative poster-child running mate and double down on Darwinian economics. Rake in the unlimited contributions and simply buy the election.
A good chunk of campaign cash can flip a close election. But the mistake the Romney folks make, is trying to extrapolate that and assuming that a whole lot of money can flip a not-so-close election.
They are forgetting the law of diminishing returns. Short of handing out cash to literally buy votes (which believe it or not is still illegal) you can't just keep running more and more ads and expect people to be persuaded.
Family Values Fundraiser hosted by Adelson - that is Rich!!!
Adeleson makes money off of people gambling, drinking, smoking and let us be honest most if not all Casinos have “ladies of the evening” roaming through the casinos
seeking companionship and this man is hosting a Family Values Fundraiser? Article on Investor’s Business Daily by James Detar – Posted 8/13/12: Las Vegas Sands Hit With 3rd Probe Of Activities Gambling regulators in Nevada have joined the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Justice Department in scrutinizing Las Vegas Sands' (LVS) business dealings in Chinese gambling enclave Macau, reports said. The agencies are probing assertions that Sands employees bribed local officials in Asia to get favorable treatment for new casinos.
Doesn't Adelson represent everything the Mormon Religion rejects?
Except money. And that forgives a lot of sins.
a "finance event"? Hilarious. poor little "aide".
and yes, Adelson, being a purveyor of everything bad to Mormons (I bet he serves coffee and Coke in his establishments!), as well as being a Jew, surely does represent everything that Romney is supposedly against.
Back in the good ol' days. Romney used the same bait n' switch tactics on the workers at the companies Bain took over.
Go into a community; make fantastic pie in the sky promises to the workers and mid-management; screw everyone; get out of town before they figure out you bankrupted their livelihoods; rinse repeat.
And yet, here we are. "Does anyone really, truly think that he'll push these much more severe, unpopular cuts when in office?" It seems hard to believe. But I also wonder if anyone can explain why he's pushing these severe, unpopular cuts before he gets to office.
______________________________
Romney does not seem to be paying any price in the polls for his extremism.
DEMs would like a level playing field so we can have FREEDOM FOR ALL !
GOP would like less corp. regulations so they can have a FREE-FOR-ALL !
Anyone with a sense of logic should understand that if releasing his tax returns would allow Romney to make liars of his critics, he would do it. He has something to hide, so who does he think he's fooling?
Here is a reason not being discussed that helps explain why he won't release his returns for the years 2001 and 2002: He claims he had absolutely no role in the management of Bain during those years, but release of those returns will probably show that he DID play a significant role.
Finally: Now that Ryan is on the ticket, let's hear more about his intransigence and 19th-century attitude on women's rights, not just how he will "end Medicare as we know it." This man is a failure on many levels, and the public must be constantly reminded of that fact.
Well said, very good point. And he probably broke residency laws running for governor. I care much more about his policies than past tax records, but based on his proposals, he needs to lose. So Romney: where are those tax returns?
I demand to see the long-form worth certificates!
;-)
Romney has never need to use any social program since he was born with the proverbial spoon, attended prep schools and then on to the Ivy League. He made a large deal of money by saddling companies with debt and then robbing the pensions and selling off the carcass. He has no idea what the middle to lower middle class family needs. This is why he would cut programs like student aid, or head start which is pre school for the low income families. He is completely out of touch and owes more to the investor community that any other.so by lowering the deficit ow and raising interest rates those holding bonds would do very well, while those needing infrastructure repair, police or teachers whodunit do so well. Welcome to the social Darwinism of the republican party that lavishes riches on the winners, those with the most and scorn on the losers, those with the least
Rmoney is a fraud, Gordon Gecko in the flesh, financed by profiteers and foreign entities and casino moguls, but is still backed by the 'religious right', because they've been conditioned to think that democrats are the enemy.
Who's gonna break it to these @!$%#s that they've been taken?
Religious Right?
How do you think these people would think and behave if they had to refer to themselves as "Christ-like" instead of "Christian"?
Thought: what if there were a clever republican cabal? OK, i never believe in conspiracies because they rather assume intelligence enough to keep a secret. So what are the odds that a bunch of dimwits actually are not so dim? OK, to my point: What of this whole Paul Ryan thing is Mitt taking one for the team? He sees the wolrd through Mormon colored glasses, right? Anyway, here's the point:
This is all about making Mr. Ryan viable in 2016. It really is. Mitt and his gang know its all over. They have access to math we do not. But if they throw a long pass to Mr. Ryan. And it is short. He is still heroic. This is about that. And in four years they will have twice as many gigantic dollars and think that this near loss makes this young dynamic guy more dangerous than Satan himself. really...