Budgets are wonderful, and I love them. I love all of the charts, the graphs, the tables and appendixes. Budgets are so fantastic because they make us take a hard, serious look at numbers. We are forced to make priorities, and we are challenged to make tradeoffs on what we can do without, and what we truly need. The budget is the proof in the pudding, and it is what forces the government to be brutally honest with itself, and the American people. With people preparing their 2012 taxes, a short look at some of the differences between President Obama’s budget proposals, and those of Mitt Romney are in order.
Comparing the fiscal plans between Obama and Romney is almost like comparing apples to oranges. The reason is that while Obama is on the hot seat and needs to make his numbers add up, Romney is just running a campaign in the primaries. He can make budget promises without having his feet held to the fire over them, whereas Obama is not afforded that luxury.
However you slice it, though, taxes under both the Romney and Obama plans are lower than they would be if we simply allowed the tax cuts put in place by George Bush to expire and tax rates returned to the rates of the Clinton era. If that happened, tax rates would be almost 20.4% of the GDP. This, despite the reverence that Democrats have for Bill Clinton‘s former economic policies, and the panic that Republicans are in over Obama’s tax ideas. I suppose that is why I just love budgets. They help everybody keep an eye on everybody else.