Is Donald Trump running a “comic book version of a presidential campaign”? Some of us certainly think so, but posing such a question to Trump at a candidate forum is pointless and theatrical. Since Wednesday night, CNBC has been raked over the coals by conservatives for debate questions of this type — and the critics have a point.
Still, the forum in Boulder wasn’t entirely empty fireworks. It confirmed, for example, that some of the candidates, including the poll-leading Trump and Ben Carson, are in denial about the impact of their tax-cutting plans on the federal budget. They believe their plans will spur enough economic growth to offset the loss of revenue or they promise a massive shrinking of the federal government — or both.
Ted Cruz, who this week released a plan for a 10 percent flat tax for individuals and a 16 percent “business transfer tax,” accurately noted that the Tax Foundation had estimated his plan’s blow to federal revenue would amount to “less than a trillion dollars [$768 million]” over 10 years when “dynamic scoring” is used — meaning when assumptions regarding the positive effects on growth are included.
What Cruz failed to add, however, is that without dynamic scoring, the Tax Foundation estimates his plan would cost the Treasury $3.6 trillion over 10 years — which is unacceptable. With federal debt now at a disturbing 74 percent of gross domestic product, tax reform can and should be as close to revenue neutral as possible.
By the way, the Tax Foundation pegs the loss of federal revenues under Trump’s tax plan to be a shocking $10 trillion, with dynamic scoring.
Meanwhile, the Democratic candidates are stuck in their own version of denial regarding the federal budget and debt. They resist any serious reform of entitlements, such as slowing the real growth of Social Security benefits for the non-poor (with Bernie Sanders advocating a major benefits expansion). And they casually tick off numerous areas, such as higher education, where more spending is desirable while insisting this can be done only at the expense of the rich.
That’s ludicrous, actually.
Voters can only hope that the discussion of taxes, spending and debt takes a more realistic turn once the primary season is over.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
