Is Hillary Clinton's college plan really plausible? This is a question that still remains unanswered, because in an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), it is found that Clinton's college plan for students would add $500 billion to the national debt, in contrary to Clinton's claim that she can make the plan materialize without adding a penny to the country's debt.
The Affordable Care Act is gone. Nearly 21 million Americans have lost health insurance, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which accepts her economic plan on its face, estimates that her policies would cost $200 billion and cause public debt to rise from over $14 trillion to more than $23 trillion over the next decade.
Clinton could tax the wealthy at a 90 percent top marginal rate, raise rates on corporations, and enact every other trickle-down tax on consumers she desires, and there’s still no way she would not add to the national debt. If she failed to enact her agenda and did absolutely nothing as president (we should be so lucky), Clinton would still add to the debt. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which accepts her economic plan on its face, estimates that her policies would cost $200 billion and cause public debt to rise from over $14 trillion to more than $23 trillion over the next decade.
Deficits have gone up and down over the years, but the debt has only gone in one direction—up—and it will continue to do so under the next president, whether it is Clinton or Donald Trump. “Whoever is president will actually be adding $9 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years unless they make changes,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan fiscal watchdog group. “So it won’t be policies that they put in place” that will cause an increase, “but the current trajectory is that we’ll borrow $9 trillion over the next 10 years...“For a candidate to say they have a plan that wouldn’t add a penny to the debt, they’d actually need a plan to $9 trillion,” MacGuineas said. “She doesn’t have that, and no one could actually even be expected to have that. We are going to add to the debt. “What she’s saying in budget-speak is she’s not going to add more to the debt than we are already on track to borrow,” she said.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has tallied the candidates’ spending promises and estimated that Clinton would raise spending by $1.65 trillion while Trump would cut spending by $1.2 trillion over the next decade.
"Whoever is the next president will preside over a period where if we don't make changes, we will add $9 trillion to the debt over the next ten years." -- Maya MacGuineas.
Neither Democrat Clinton nor Republican Trump have put forward a plan to address the situation. In fact, Trump, whose main economic policy revolves around a massive tax cut, could add $5.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. And even Clinton, who has proposed a far more modest combination of tax hikes and new spending, would still do little to fix it, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
The non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that the Trump tax plan, which involves massive tax cuts for America’s richest citizens, would more than double the gross national debt, from $19 trillion now to $39.9 trilion by 2026.
Fox Business host Stuart Varney joined the cast of Fox & Friends on October 21 to attack Clinton for claiming during the final presidential debate that her tax plan “will not add a penny to the debt.” Varney contended that Clinton’s statement was false because current federal spending is on track to accumulate roughly $9 trillion in debt over the next decade. During his critique, which cited the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) as its source on screen, Varney neglected to mention that, according to the CRFB, Clinton’s tax and spending plans would only add about $200 billion in new debt accumulation to the $9 trillion already baked into continuing federal spending. After accounting for the roughly $275 billion of new revenue that Clinton estimates her proposed business tax reforms will generate, her proposals are more or less balanced.
Hillary Clinton’s false claims
1. Falsely said, “I also will not add a penny to the debt.” (Her tax plan will add $200 billion to the debt, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget says.)
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which accepts her economic plan on its face, found that under it debt would rise from $14 trillion to more than $23 trillion over the next decade — with her plans adding $200 billion.
You, like me, might find this estimate implausibly low. But even in the fantastical world of contemporary progressive economics, $200 billion is a lot more than a “penny.”
While Clinton has said her proposals wouldn’t add to the federal debt, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has estimated they would likely add $200 billion to the debt during the next decade, while Trump’s policies would add $5.3 trillion.
A recent report by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget projected that Trump’s policies would add $5.3 trillion to the debt in the coming decade...Clinton last night repeated her vow that “I will not add a penny to the debt” with her proposals. However, even if Clinton as president succeeded in persuading Congress to offset the cost of her domestic agenda with $1.4 trillion of new revenue, she would still come up short and add an estimated $200 billion to the long term debt, according to Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calculations.
According to an analysis by the non-partisan Committee on a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), Hillary Clinton would likely add $200 billion to the debt over a decade, admittedly much less than $5.3 trillion CRFB estimates Donald Trump would add. However, Clinton’s plan doesn’t change the trajectory of the nation’s debt either. The non-partisan watchdog estimates that under a Clinton administration, the public-held national debt would remain follow the same track as current law -- the national debt will increase from roughly $14 trillion today to more than $23 trillion in a decade. That is an increase of $9 trillion. The CRFB adds that debt as a percentage of GDP would rise from nearly 77 percent of GDP today to 86 percent by 2026.
As for the politics: One problem is that, as of now, Clinton's claim doesn't seem to be entirely true. Her plans are mostly paid for through new taxes on the wealthy. But as of September, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget still thought that over a decade, her proposals would add an additional $200 billion to the debt, which will grow to about 86 percent of GDP.
While the large increase in borrowing occurred "under Obama," it's an overstatement to blame Obama's actions as the sole cause of the ballooning debt, according to the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
The national debt is projected to grow by $9 trillion over the next decade. But Clinton’s plan would not add significantly more to the debt, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which has analyzed the economic impact of every proposal by both nominees.
CLINTON: "I don't add a penny to the national debt."
THE FACTS: Not true, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. It estimates her increased spending in areas such as infrastructure, more financial aid for college and early childhood education, would increase the national debt by $200 billion over 10 years. That is far less than their estimate for Trump, who they predict would add $5.3 trillion over 10 years. But it's plenty more than a penny.
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both sidestepped a question in Wednesday’s debate about how to stabilize Social Security to avert benefit cuts as funding dwindles in the decades ahead. Both have vowed to oppose benefit cuts. But as moderator Chris Wallace pointed out, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan fiscal monitor, has concluded that neither candidate has a viable plan to shore up Social Security...The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget analyzed both candidates’ fiscal plans and found that Clinton would increase the national debt by $200 billion over a decade and Trump’s would increase it by $5.3 trillion.
Moderator Chris Wallace noted that the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has said that Clinton's economic plan would raise the national debt to 86 percent of Gross Domestic Product over the next ten years. Wallace also said the same group has said that Trump's plan would raise the debt to 105 percent of GDP over the next ten years.
Nonpartisan analysts who have examined the promises made by Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail have calculated that Hillary will add to both the national deficit and the national debt. For example, the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which rates Clinton’s plan as being much closer to deficit neutral than Trump’s, still projects that Clinton’s plans would add about $200 billion to the national debt.
he Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget reports, “Unfortunately, both candidates’ plans to increase the debt come on top of current law projections that already estimate that debt will grow by $9 trillion over the next decade.”
“As a result, under Clinton’s plans debt would grow from nearly 77 percent of GDP today to over 86 percent by 2026; under Trump’s plans, debt would grow to 105 percent of GDP by 2026.”
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan policy group, says Clinton’s plans would increase the debt by a relatively small amount, $200 billion over a decade "above current law levels." The Clinton campaign says a new business tax plan would generate an additional $275 billion to cancel out that debt increase. However the numbers shake out, the debt would still grow by $9 trillion over 10 years because of interest payments related to the U.S. debt.
"Interest on the debt will become the fastest growing part of federal spending. In 2017, the next president will inherit a government projected to spend over $300 billion on interest payments that year alone, an amount that grows to more than $800 billion by 2025 — more than the current combined federal spending on the Defense Department, education, transportation, and medical research," wrote Bob Bixby and Maya MacGuineas for the Brookings Institution.
The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has analyzed both of the candidates’ spending and revenue proposals, finding that neither pays for everything they’ve put forth. It’s true that Clinton comes a lot closer to paying for her spending proposals than Trump does in covering his tax cuts, according to the CRFB analysis, but she would add well more than a penny to the debt under what she has detailed thus far. CRFB estimates, updated as of Sept. 21, found that Clinton’s plans “would increase the debt by $200 billion over a decade above current law levels.” Trump’s proposals “would increase the debt by $5.3 trillion.”
Mrs. Clinton went on to say she will find “ways to get more money into it,” but flatly ruled out any benefit cuts, saying she would instead increase benefits. Budget analysts panned both candidates’ answers. “Both candidates suggested ‘easy fixes’ to #SocialSecurity. They’re not enough,” the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget said on Twitter. The CFRB said Mrs. Clinton’s plan to raise the tax cap would help, but won’t be enough. And the group said the economic growth Mr. Trump is counting on to make up deficits resulting from his tax cuts will only replace a third of the lost revenue.
Now that the full cycle of debates has come to an end, there is at least one clear winner: the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Near the end of the debate, Mr. Wallace declared, “The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has looked at both of your plans, and they say neither of you has a serious plan that is going to solve the fact that Medicare’s going to run out of money in the 2020s, Social Security is going to run out of money in the 2030s.”
However, it does nothing to reduce the existing $14 trillion public debt or shrink the ratio of debt to Gross Domestic Product, according to estimates by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB)
If her spending proposals are taken into account, the national debt would increase an estimated $9 billion over the next 10 years under Clinton, according to analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Camerota followed that clip with a report from the non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which rated Clinton’s claim as false. The committee found that Clinton’s plan would actually increase the national debt by $200 billion over a decade. When Camerota asked Kaine to comment, he avoided agreeing with Clinton’s statement and suggested that the costs of Clinton’s financial plan cannot be reliably predicted.