Obama’s Latest Spending Plan: What Does It Really Do?

Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee have now had an opportunity to analyze the spending plan that President Obama put forth this morning, and the results are as disappointing as one would expect. The plan includes no net spending cuts at all. Jeff Sessions issued a statement that said in part:

Today marks the president’s fourth attempt to deliver a credible deficit plan in just 8 months. Regrettably, the president has once again failed to deliver the honest, straightforward plan that he promised—the plan that America deserves and that our economy needs.

When you remove the accounting tricks and Washington gimmicks from the president’s plan you’re left with only half of the $3 trillion in deficit reduction the White House promised. The White House also claims the president’s plan is $2 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. But in truth, the president’s deficit reduction comes entirely from tax hikes. Total federal spending, including the stimulus, will increase under the president’s plan, not decrease. On balance, there is not a penny of net spending that is cut.

The White House further claims the president’s plan would mean, in just a few years, that “current spending is no longer adding to our debt.” But the president’s plan would never once produce a deficit smaller than $482 billion and would produce a deficit of $565 billion in its tenth year. Gross debt would grow by $9.7 trillion dollars.

The president also says his stimulus proposal is fully paid for. But the numbers show that the president’s stimulus will swell next year’s deficit by $348 billion—to $1.3 trillion—for the 4th consecutive year of $1 trillion-plus deficits.

This plan is gimmick piled upon gimmick, adding up to little more than a tax hike camouflaged as fiscal restraint. Promised spending control is nowhere to be found.

This chart sums up what the President’s plan really does:

Once again, President Obama shows a complete lack of seriousness in addressing the nation’s fiscal crisis.

Responses