October 19, 2000 | News Releases on Federal Budget
An analysis of both plans, prepared by The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis at the request of Investor's Business Daily, shows that both plans boost family income, expand economic growth and reduce federal debt-but do so to different degrees.
Gov. Bush's plan, for example, would increase the inflation-adjusted disposable income of a family of four by $4,680 in fiscal year (FY) 2010, while the vice president's plan increases it by $2,536. By the end of FY 2010, Bush's plan would expand the nation's economic output by $111.3 billion; Gore's plan would increase it by $105.2 billion. The federal debt would drop to $381 billion under the Bush plan, and to $166 billion under the Gore plan.
Both plans would also preserve the Social Security surplus and increase personal saving. By the end of 2010, Bush's plan would increase the savings of a family of four by $1,222, while Gore's plan would see it rise by $908.
Heritage analysts William Beach and Mark Wilson, a former economist with the Department of Labor, used the widely respected WEFA economic forecasting model (developed in the late 1960s by Nobel Prize-winning economist Lawrence Klein) to simulate the dynamic economic effects of the two plans over the next decade. Under Gore, federal spending would rise by nearly $1.6 trillion, compared to just $747 billion under Bush. The Bush plan also contains $756 billion in tax relief, while the Gore plan raises tax revenue by $334 billion.