An Updated Fiscal Scorecard: Presidential Prospective Nominees Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton
The Committee for a Responsible Budget recently updated its analysis of the campaign promises and their costs over the next decade from Prospective Presidential Nominees Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. See http://crfb.org/papers/promises-and-price-tags-preliminary-update and http://crfb.org/papers/promises-and-price-tags-fiscal-guide-2016-election
The chart below summarizes their most significant findings – important reading before the first debates tonight.
+ $0.25 trillion
+ $0.05 trillion
- $1.55 trillion
+ $4.5 trillion
+ $1.55 trillion
+ $0 trillion
- $0.10 trillion
+ $0.5 trillion
+ $0.05 trillion
+ $0.7 trillion
Total budget impact
+ $0.20 trillion
+ $5.3 trillion
In other words the Trump proposals add $5.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade while Clinton adds $200 billion; Trump’s proposals increase the debt twenty-five times as much as Clinton’s. Under the Trump proposals, the national debt would rise from 86% of GDP to 105% of GDP. Under the Clinton proposals, the national debt would stay constant at about 86% of GDP.
Over the next ten years Clinton would spend $500 billion more on college education, $300 billion on infrastructure, $300 billion on paid family leave, $200 billion on early childhood education and $450 billion more on health programs. She would raise taxes on high-income individuals by $1.45 trillion over the next decade.
Over the next decade, Trump would spend $4.50 trillion on cutting taxes, primarily for high-income individuals and $500 billion on improving care at the VA (Veterans Administration) by contracting with private hospitals and doctors and $450 billion on increased defense spending. He would spend $50 billion on paid family leave and $550 billion on tax cuts for child care costs.
On health care over the next decade, Clinton would save $250 billion by cutting reimbursements to drug companies and adopting the public option, spend $100 billion by repealing the Cadillac benefits tax, and expand ACA coverage at a cost of $450 billion. Her improvements to the ACA are as follows: 100% federal matching for three years for new Medicaid expansion states (e.g. Texas, Florida, etc.), 8.5% cap on ACA premiums as a percent of family or individual income, fix the family glitch, Medicare buy-in for those over 55, and a new refundable tax credit for family out of pocket and premium costs that exceed 5% of household income.
On health care over the next decade, Trump would save $500 billion by block granting Medicaid to the states, spend $500 billion by repealing the Affordable Care Act, and spend $100 billion by expanding tax deductibility of HSAs and increasing tax deductibility of individuals’ health insurance premiums. He also proposes to cut non-defense discretionary spending by 1% each year; this would include programs such as federally qualified community health centers (FQHCs) and the National Health Service Corps (NHSC).
There are extremely sharp distinctions between the two candidates on the federal budget, health, education, taxes and defense spending. The biggest differences are that the Trump proposed budget policies are overwhelmingly tilted to increasing tax breaks for the very wealthy while the Clinton policies finance proposed improvements in education, child care, and health care by ending tax breaks and loopholes for the very wealthy. Trump’s proposals would massively increase federal deficit spending by cutting taxes while Clinton’s proposals would balance increased spending with increased taxes.
Prepared by: Lucien Wulsin
Date: September 26, 2016