2007 Des Moines Register Republican debate: on Budget & Economy

Duncan Hunter: Budget deficit & trade deficit to China create security risk

A: There are two debts that are a threat to the national security. One is the budget deficit, which is going to be about $161 billion this year, but the real deficit, the real loss that we have right now that is a threat to national security is a trade loss. The trade loss this year is going to be $800 billion. It’s going to be $200 billion to communist China, which is rapidly becoming our banker, and there’s an old saying, “You don’t want to have a banker who doesn’t have your best interests at heart.“ We should level the playing field. We should stop China from cheating on trade, bring back a lot of those high-paying manufacturing jobs to this country that we pushed off-shore. That means bigger paychecks. That means more money going into the Federal Treasury and to Social Security and to Medicare, eliminate those twin deficits, and we’ll be on the right track.

Fred Thompson: $9 trillion debt affects our national security

A: Our country has a $9 trillion debt. A good chunk of that is owned by China. We’re bankrupting the next generation without any question. Every economist in Washington who’s looked at it will tell you that. It affects our national security; for one reason is because we’re squeezing military spending. We’re spending at below historic norms under these circumstances for our defense, and we’re spending twice as much for entitlements.

Fred Thompson: Deficit spending ok for military, infrastructure, and R&D

A: Yes, the military, the security of our people, first and foremost, always; our infrastructure, which is coming apart; and research and development, which is going to help us solve some of the problems in the future as far as energy and a lot of other issues. But [we need to concentrate on reforming] our entitlement programs; by 2040 or so we’re going to eat up our entire budget.

John McCain: Loss of economic strength leads to losing military strength

A: Of course, any nation that no longer has economic strength sooner or later will lose its military strength, so it’s a national security issue. We have many trillions of dollars of unfunded liability. Obviously, we’ve been on a spending spree. If oil reaches $100 a barrel, which many people think it may, $400 billion of America treasure will go to oil-producing countries. Some of those monies will go to terrorist organizations.

Mike Huckabee: Do things differently so people need not sacrifice

A: Sometimes it’s not so much doing things so that people sacrifice; it’s doing them differently. Let me give you an example. A lot of the federal budget goes to health care. We need to do what most American companies are finding works in reducing health care cost. That’s moving from the intervention-based health care model to a prevention-based. Our current model is upside-down. We wait until people are catastrophically ill and then we spend the most expensive ways of trying to cure incurable diseases. If we would put the focus on prevention, we would find, like American business is finding, that there really is savings if you kill the snake rather than just treat the snakebites, which is the way our current system is built.

Mitt Romney: Economic strength comes from people, not from Washington

A: This is, indeed, a time of extraordinary challenges in this country, and the overspending in Washington and the overpromises that we’ve made are certainly among those challenges. But this is not a time for us to wring our hands and think that the future is bleak. In fact, the future is bright. We need leadership to rein in excessive spending, and to help America grow. The best answer for our economic woes is to make sure we have good jobs for our citizens, good schools for our kids, good health care for everyone, and that we have policies that promote the growth of the nation. We can have a level playing field around the world, get ourselves off of foreign oil, reduce the excessive spending in Washington, and have a bright future for our kids. This is based upon the strength of the American people. If you want to see a strong America, you don’t look to Washington; you look to ways to strengthen the American people.

Mitt Romney: Cut deficit via waste, like 342 different economic programs

A: Well, we don’t have to run a deficit to pay for the things that are most important because we can eliminate the things that aren’t critical. We have, in the federal government, 342 different economic development programs, often administered by different departments. We don’t need 342. We probably need a lot fewer than 100 of those. We have 40 different programs for workforce training. There are probably 5 or 6 that are really working. We can get rid of some of those. And so what anyone in the private sector’s learned how to do is to focus their resources on those things that have the biggest impact, that are most important. Surely, protecting our country and our defense of our military is critical [as are healthcare and schools]. And the sacrifice we need from the American people, it’s this: it’s saying let the programs that don’t work go. Don’t lobby for them forever.

Ron Paul: Give up American empire; that reduces debt without sacrifice

A: I think it’s absolutely unnecessary to sacrifice. It’s unnecessary. We can cut by looking at our foreign policy. We maintain an empire which we can’t afford. We have 700 bases overseas. We are in 130 countries. We cut there, and then we have a better defense of this country, and the people get that money and they get to spend it here at home. There’s no need to sacrifice.

Ron Paul: We spend too much, tax too much, & print too much money

A: It’s absolutely a threat to our national security because we’ve spent too much, we tax too much, we borrow too much, and we print too much. When a country spends way beyond its means, eventually it will destroy the currency, and we’re in the midst of a currency crisis. Our dollar is going down rapidly as we speak. It’s because we have lived beyond our means. We can’t afford the foreign policy that we have. We have to cut back. We have to live within our means. If we’re going to spend money, we ought to spend it at home, and that is why we have to change this foreign policy. We can’t afford it to do what we’re doing today because it will destroy our dollar.

Rudy Giuliani: Retire 42% of federal employees in next decade, to save $20B

A: I believe that it’s a major problem, and it’s one that hasn’t been addressed the way it should be over the course of the last 20 years. And there are three major things that we have to do. First, we have to reduce government spending, and we have to be very disciplined about that. And we have to do it by imposing spending caps on the civilian agencies in governments--maybe 15%. We have to say that we’re not going to rehire half of the civilian employees that come up for retirement. 42% are coming up over the course of the next 8 to 10 years. They should not be rehired. That would give us a $20 to $22 billion reduction. And then we have to reduce taxes.

Q: Yes or no, is the debt a threat to our national security?

A: I wouldn’t call it national security. I would call it economic security. It’s very, very important. I think of Islamic terrorism as being national security. Economic security is also very important.

Rudy Giuliani: Restrain Congress’ spending; don’t ask people to sacrifice

A: Well, I think the most important thing is the federal government has to restrain its spending. The problem is not the American people. What we should be doing is restraining the amount of money that Washington spends in a concerted way, with major reductions in civilian spending, using attrition, and leaving more money in the pockets of the American people. The strength of America is not its central government; the strength of America are its people. Restrain the central government, give people more choice, more money to spend, we’re going to see our economy booming.

Rudy Giuliani: 10% across-the-board cut; people can get services other ways

A: Well, that would require their trying to figure out other ways to do it. I mean, rather than moving in the direction of more people on government medicine, I’d rather see us reduce the income tax burden, create an exemption for health care so people can buy their own health care. So that’s going to require they take a little bit more time, take a little more ownership of their health care. Rather than relying on government as the nanny government, let’s rely on people to make choices about their health care. Let’s rely on, instead of 17 million people buying their own health insurance, 50, 60, 70 million. You’ll see the price come all the way down and you’ll see the quality come up. That’s an American solution. It’s a bold one, but it’s the kind of thing America has done in the past. We rely on our people, not on our government.

Tom Tancredo: End womb-to-tomb protections; stick to Constitutional limits

A: I would say that there is a very clear way to establish what the government needs to do in order to reduce the cost that it incurs and to do what is right, an that is to follow the Constitution of this country. The Constitution is a limiting document. It tells the federal government what it can and cannot do. Today we do far too many things that exceed the constitutional bounds that are placed there. We have a responsibility to protect & defend this country. Concentrate on what the Constitution itself gives us the responsibility for, & the rest of that stuff becomes extraneous.

Q: Who would you ask to sacrifice first, by cutting their program?

A: If you ask America, what would you sacrifice, the one thing I would say is this: Don’t ask the government for womb-to-tomb protection for your life, to build a bubble around you because all of that will cost a humongous amount of money that we don’t have