|Dedicated to helping citizens of all generations understand how tax and spending policies affect them.||Home | Donate | RSS | Log in|
Study: Buck’s, Bennet’s Federal Budget Plans Affect Spending At Margins, but Many Unknowns Remain
October 28, 2010
By Pete Sepp
(Alexandria, VA) – Colorado Senate candidates Michael Bennet and Ken Buck have made much of each other’s words during their campaigns, but what meaning will those words have after the election, when next year’s budget is debated? According to the National Taxpayers Union Foundation’s (NTUF’s) line-by-line analysis, Bennet’s promises would amount to a federal spending increase of just over $7 billion, while Buck’s platform would amount to a cut in outlays of more than $1 billion. However, both candidates made many proposals whose costs or savings are impossible to calculate but could have a substantial impact.
To view Bennet's analysis in full, click here.
To view Buck's analysis in full, click here.
“To hear them tell it, just about every federal candidate would make major positive changes to the federal budget, but rhetoric often collides with reality,” NTUF Senior Policy Analyst Demian Brady stated. “NTUF’s issue-based studies provide citizens with some answers – and often more questions to ask – about the costs and benefits of the candidates’ proposals.”
In preparing his analysis, Brady and his colleague, NTUF Policy Analyst Dan Barrett, utilized campaign websites, transcripts of debates, and news sources to gather information on any proposals from the two leading Colorado Senate race contenders that could impact the level of federal spending. He in turn verified cost estimates for these items against independent sources such as the Congressional Budget Office. He also cross-checked items through NTUF’s BillTally system, which since 1991 has computed agenda costs for each Member of Congress based on their sponsorship of bills. Among the findings:
“Long after the sloganeering has faded away, the issues discussed in campaigns will have an impact on taxpayers,” Brady concluded. “The national conversation over the size of the federal budget will continue, as will NTUF’s efforts to inform it.”
NTUF’s analysis of the Colorado candidates’ agendas is one of several the group is currently conducting. Contests are being selected on factors such as geographic diversity, political significance as rated by outside groups and analysts, and the level of specificity in the candidates’ platforms.
NTUF is the research and educational arm of the 362,000-member National Taxpayers Union, a non-profit citizen group. Note: The line-by-line cost analyses of the Colorado and other Senate candidates’ spending agendas, along with more information on BillTally, are available online at www.ntu.org.