On Thursday I received an interesting release from the National Taxpayers Union. I’m pleased that it’s a private entity figuring this stuff out, I guess those who donate to the group are paying for the staffer or two who has to sit through watching the news videos and spend the rest of their time reading all of the press releases to ascertain what new spending program comes up next. Here’s the important portion of what the NTU said:
As John McCain and Barack Obama jockeyed for position in the race to appear “leader-like” over the economy and in upcoming debates, the latest update of the National Taxpayers Union Foundation’s (NTUF) candidate cost analysis project shows that despite their different styles, the major party Presidential hopefuls have one thing in common: both their agendas would add billions more to the taxpayer’s tab every year.
NTUF’s fourth and final round of assigning price tags to the candidates’ platforms since January 29 found that Sen. McCain (R-AZ) would increase yearly federal spending by $92.4 billion, compared to Sen. Obama’s (D-IL) $293.0 billion. NTUF also released a first-time analysis of Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr, who would instead cut annual federal spending by $200.9 billion. The studies include proposals through September 19.
“Both the McCain and Obama campaigns have tried to keep pace with the political issues of the day — largely by responding with proposals for new programs and regulations that could reach deeper and deeper into taxpayers’ pockets,” NTUF Senior Policy Analyst Demian Brady said. “On the other side of the spectrum, Bob Barr’s Libertarian philosophy is strongly reflected in a platform that is built upon cutting programs and slashing spending.” (Emphasis in original.)
It’s notable that both Obama and Barr take “savings” from withdrawing our troops fighting the Long War. It accounts for almost half of Barr’s total cuts, with much of the rest coming from disbanding the Department of Education. Unfortunately the NTUF doesn’t figure out the numbers for Constitution Party nominee Chuck Baldwin, who is on Maryland’s ballot as an unaffiliated candidate – I suspect his may be similar to Barr’s.
One weakness insofar as I can tell with the NTUF study is that it doesn’t account for the inside the Beltway practice of “baseline budgeting”, where spending the exact same amount of money year-over-year (or even a small increase) is considered a “cut”. And let’s face a cold hard reality here: with a federal budget now north of $3 trillion and trillions more in unfunded liabilities because of entitlement programs built up over the last seventy years, even the cuts Barr proposes are but a drop in the bucket (about 7% of the total budget, including the withdrawal of troops.)
It’s a point I’m going to expand on in a later post, but Americans need a sea change in their attitudes about government before progress can be made. I applaud the Barr stance on cutting spending (except for troop withdrawals, of course) but if he gets 2% of the vote it would be cause for celebration among the Libertarians who read here. And that’s part of the problem – there are too many among us who talk the talk but only walk the walk until they find their pet program is the one under the meat cleaver.
The first thing which has to go in this new educational effort is support for the idea of privatizing profit but socializing risk. This bailout we’re going through is but the latest chapter in a sorry evolution, and it’s where I’m going to take this concept when I get back to it later this week.
