Rating Candidates’ Economic Plans: Obama and Ron Paul Plans Produce Lowest Debt to GDP Rate

Based on data [PDF] from US Budget Watch from CRFB, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget — analysis from libertarian Reason Magazine:
How is it that Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich would end up increasing the federal debt? It’s pretty simple, really: They would cut taxes, but wouldn’t cut spending to match. Santorum’s policies would reduce spending by a little more than $2 trillion, but would cut taxes by $6 trillion. Gingrich would cut slightly more in spending—about $2.7 trillion—but would cut taxes by $7 trillion and actually add $1.6 trillion in spending to overhaul Social Security, among other policy changes. Romney’s vague plans score better, but wouldn’t reduce the debt, and would probably push it slightly higher than it otherwise would have been. Ron Paul, on the other hand, would cut taxes, but he’d cut spending even more. His tax cuts would reduce the tax burden by $5.2 trillion; meanwhile, he would reduce spending by $7.2 trillion.
H/t: Daily Dish.

Early last year, Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry declared the passage of a law requiring women seeking abortions to undergo sonograms an “emergency item” on the Legislature’s calendar. Despite the fact that the procedures are medically unnecessary, the Big Government Republicans who control the Texas Legislature passed the bill, and Gov. Perry signed it into law in May 2011, three months before he launched his bid for the GOP presidential nomination.
Not only is Newt Gingrich’s campaign failing to win continued support among deep pocket Republicans, it looks like it’s trying to save money the old fashioned way: by not paying bills.
