by Kristina Rasmussen, Illinois Policy Institute
The National Taxpayers Union Foundation just released its comprehensive analysis of the Illinois Senate candidates' spending agendas, and it shows a big difference in price tags:
According to a line-by-line analysis from the non-partisan National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF), Giannoulias’s campaign platform would increase Washington’s current outlays by over $76 billion, while Kirk would raise spending by slightly more than $700 million. However, both candidates have made proposals whose costs or savings are impossible to calculate.
Needless to say, $76 billion is waaaay more than $700 million. Get the details:
To view Giannoulias' spending analysis in its entirety, click here.
To view Kirk's spending analysis in its entirety, click here.
Other findings:
Major items in Giannoulias’s fiscal platform include an estimated $51.54 billion for a “cap-and-trade” carbon regulation/renewable energy spending plan, $4.591 billion to boost federal research and development funding, and $4.5 billion for a new “National Infrastructure Fund.” One proposal he made to reduce outlays, by $3 million in one year, would cancel increases in federal lawmakers’ pay until federal deficits are addressed.
Kirk’s agenda features higher funding for airports ($2.776 billion annually), as well as environmental cleanup and revitalization for the city of Rockford ($373 million). These and other spending items were partially offset by the budget savings ($2.575 billion) from medical liability reforms.
How did NTUF get these numbers?
In preparing his analysis, NTUF Director of Congressional Analysis Jeff Dircksen utilized campaign websites, transcripts of debates, and news sources to gather information on any proposals from the two leading Illinois Senate race contenders that could impact the level of federal spending. He in turn verified cost estimates for these items against independent sources such as the Congressional Budget Office. He also cross-checked items through NTUF’s BillTally system, which since 1991 has computed agenda costs for each Member of Congress based on their sponsorship of bills.
