The $4 trillion gap: Obama vs. Ryan, an apples-to-apples budget comparison
OK, let‚Äôs try and actually compare the new Obama budget plan — ‚ÄúThe Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility‚ÄĚ — with Rep. Paul Ryan‚Äôs¬†‚ÄúPath to Prosperity.‚ÄĚ My calculations — partly based on work done by Goldman Sachs — find that the Ryan Path would save more than double, 130 percent. In dollars, it‚Äôs a difference of $3.9 trillion (nearly 2/3 from higher taxes, net interest expense savings).
1) Obama says his plan cuts $4 trillion in debt over 12 years vs. … something or other. Ryan says his plan cuts $4.4 trillion over ten years vs. Obama‚Äôs original 2012 budget from February.
2) To do an apples-to-apples comparison, it‚Äôs necessary to a) plot them over the same time span; b) compare them against the same baseline and c) adjust them for similar economic assumptions. Goldman Sachs does the first two steps for me. It plots both plans vs. what the CBO calls its ‚Äúalternate‚ÄĚ baseline — the one it thinks most likely. (For instance, it does not assume all the Bush tax cuts get repealed like the main CBO baseline does.) Goldman thinks that’s what the White House did, too.
3) Goldman Sachs also adds back in Obama‚Äôs pledge to let the top-end Bush tax cuts expire, something which isn‚Äôt clear from Obama‚Äôs speech or subsequent White House fact sheet. Here is the chart of Goldman‚Äôs findings:
5) Those savings ‚Äď 2.4 percent for Obama, 3.5 percent for Ryan — are over ten years vs. cumulative GDP of $196 trillion over 2012-2021 (not counting interest expense). In dollar amounts, that works to savings of $4.7 trillion for Obama and $6.9 trillion for Ryan. So the Ryan Path saves $2.2 trillion more.
6) But that‚Äôs not all! The Obama Framework likely uses the same higher growth assumptions as Obama‚Äôs February budget. When CBO re-ran that budget using its own gloomier forecast, it found the Obama plan raised $1.7 trillion less than it claimed. Ryan uses the CBO numbers. So a back-of-the-envelope estimate — adjusted for similar economic assumptions — finds the Obama Framework would only save $3 trillion vs. $6.9 trillion for the Ryan Path over ten years. And nearly 2/3 of Obama’s savings comes from higher taxes (net interest).