CRFB Scores Warren and Brown Campaign Plans
Much of the focus on budget plans has revolved around the two presidential candidates, but Members of Congress have a tremendous impact on the federal budget. In conjuction with the Boston Globe, CRFB's U.S. Budget Watch project has evaluated the budget impact of the campaign promises in one of the most closely contested races in the nation, Massachusetts, between the Republican incumbent Sen. Scott Brown and Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren.
CRFB Senior Policy Analyst, Jeff Vanke, conducted the analysis, finding that Brown would reduce the deficit by $610 billion and that Warren would reduce the deficit by $1.03 trillion. Both candidates were far short of the $4-$5 trillion that is needed to stabilize the debt as a share of the economy and put it on a clear downward path this decade.
It is no secret that our current path is unsustainable, and we need leadership now to give the country a plan to put its finances back on the right track. For us, this means more than just empty promises; rather, we need plans that will control rising debt. Vanke told the Globe that the two candidates still had a lot of work to do since "neither one of them have proposals in their responses to you that come anywhere near tackling that problem."
In a February report by CRFB's U.S. Budget Watch, we examined the Republican primary candidates, receiving praise for our analysis and providing journalists and citizens with a quantitative estimate on the effect of the major candidates plan's to tackle one of our most important issues -- the federal deficit. We hope that our analysis will add the same depth to the Massachusetts Senate race. November is a few months away, but candidates should have a plan in mind so whoever wins will be ready to tackle the problem when they take office in January.
The full scoring of Brown's and Warren's campaign promises can be found here.