Veronique de Rugy explains Democrats’ predicament at The American Spectator, pointing out that none of the candidates has a plan to “pay for most of what they propose,” and that “the tax plans they have so far are mostly a recipe for less revenue and seriously slower economic growth.” She writes (abridged):
Because our government is $23 trillion in debt and its annual budget deficits are permanently heading north of $1 trillion, every American should agree that there isn’t much space for more spending.
And yet Sen. Elizabeth Warren promises that if she becomes president, she will spend $49 trillion over the next 10 years on programs like “Medicare for All,” “free” college, and many new family entitlements.
Meanwhile, Sen. Bernie Sanders would like to spend as much as $97.5 trillion over the next decade. That’s on top of a $15.5 trillion baseline deficit, according to Brian Riedl at the Manhattan Institute.
None of these politicians has a plan to pay for most of what they propose, and the tax plans they have so far are mostly a recipe for less revenue and seriously slower economic growth.
Nor is there any word yet on how to reduce the gigantic deficit that the current Medicare system already faces. As Riedl explains, that shortfall “is projected to total $44 trillion over the next 30 years — plus an additional $28 trillion in resulting interest costs.
Meanwhile, Sanders would like to spend twice what Warren proposes.
Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
Read more here.
Latest posts by Richard C. Young (see all)
- Bernie Spouts Ideas that Only College Students Could Love. - February 21, 2020
- Democrats Debate Like Animal House Report Card Day - February 20, 2020
- How Important is Wisconsin to Trump in 2020? - February 19, 2020