President Obama’s Deficit Plan Builds on Simpson-Bowles’ Balanced Recommendations; Romney’s Plan Is Fundamentally Incompatible
On CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday, Romney again tried to link his own tax and fiscal plan with the recommendations of the President's Simpson-Bowles budget commission.
- The reality is that Romney’s plan is fundamentally incompatible with Simpson-Bowles.
- President Obama has a plan that would reduce the deficit by more than $4 trillion, while Mitt Romney’s plans would increase it by as much as $5 trillion.
- Please see this campaign memo, which includes a side-by-side comparison of Simpson-Bowles, the President’s plan, and Romney’s plan.
President Obama has proposed a specific plan that takes a balanced approach to reduce the deficit and stabilize the national debt similar to that advocated by Simpson-Bowles.
- Same Framework: It embraces Simpson-Bowles’ fundamental philosophy – a balanced approach that finds specific cuts and savings across the budget, asks the wealthiest to pay their fair share, includes a revenue contribution, and protects key investments in our future and programs for vulnerable Americans.
- More Savings in Annual Domestic Spending: It includes more savings in annual domestic spending than recommended by Simpson-Bowles. Already enacted, they will reduce annual domestic spending as a share of the economy to its lowest level in 50 years.
- Savings from Smart, Responsible Reforms: More savings would come from reforming Medicare, Medicaid, agriculture subsidies, federal worker retirement and the postal service – incorporating elements of the Simpson-Bowles report.
Mitt Romney’s budget plans are fundamentally incompatible with Simpson-Bowles.
- Unbalanced: He refuses to ask the wealthiest Americans to contribute even one more dollar to help reduce the deficit, even if every dollar in revenue would be matched with $10 in cuts. Instead he would cut taxes for wealthy taxpayers like himself by 25 percent while raising taxes on 18 million Americans.
- Doesn’t Add Up: He has described tax cuts that would explode the deficit by $5 trillion, but refuses to describe a single reform or loophole he’d close to pay for it.
- More Spending: Independent analysts say his defense buildup could cost another $2 trillion, even though it’s not backed by a clear national security strategy.
- Shortchanges Key Investments: He supports the cuts to domestic programs from the House Republican budget, which would be far deeper than Simpson-Bowles, jeopardizing investments in our future and protections for the most vulnerable.