Never vote for unbalanced budget - balance the budget in 3 years???

[Elwar]

Ok, I noticed on the latest ad and a few other ads that the campaign is saying that Ron Paul is voting against unbalanced budgets and then it says his plan is to balance the budget in 3 years...

So, the first 2 years, will he be voting for an unbalanced budget?

I can see how perhaps the statement "voting against unbalanced budgets" could mean that he has always voted against an unbalanced budget. But it is a bit ambiguous.

I understand that he will be cutting the budget by a trillion dollars year one and that brings it very close to a balanced budget, but I am curious how he will react when he has to authorize the borrowing of money those first two years.

[specsaregood]

If they agree to his 3 year plan; then voting/approving of the 1st year can be interpretted as voting for a balanced budget; just one that covers a 3 year span.

[bluesc]

I was thinking about this too. Perhaps he will become practical once in the White House.

[erowe1]

So, the first 2 years, will he be voting for an unbalanced budget?

No. He won't be voting on anything. He won't be in Congress.

[Elwar]

No. He won't be voting on anything. He won't be in Congress.

:)

I am sure he will miss it.

[erowe1]

I actually think he could do some good by throwing out any balanced budget talk and emphasize cutting taxes and cutting spending.

[Zippyjuan]

Compared to the 2010 budget, his first year plan is for expenditures of $2.8 trillion http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/ron-paul-plan-to-restore-america/ vs $3.5 trillion for 2010 which would be $700 billion lower- a pretty significant haircut for the government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget

He then lets spending rise only very gradually and expects rising revenues to finally get the budget to balance in later years- his estimates indicate revenue rises by 25% over three years- a pretty hefty increase there ($2.4 trillion to $3.1 trillion by 2016).

If he becomes president he will have to sign an unbalanced budget (unless he thinks Congress will be able to over-ride his veto) until it is balanced (assuming he is president and his plan gets put into action- remember that Congress will do the actual spending bill writing).

[tsai3904]

He then lets spending rise only very gradually and expects rising revenues to finally get the budget to balance in later years- his estimates indicate revenue rises by 25% over three years- a pretty hefty increase there ($2.4 trillion to $3.1 trillion by 2016).

He uses CBO's estimates for baseline revenues, which, I think, everyone must use when they produce a budget.