Ted Cruz on Budget & Economy
CRUZ: Absolutely yes. You know, I have spent much of my adult life enforcing the law and defending the Constitution. And the problem that underlies all of this is the cronyism and corruption of Washington.
Q: Would you bail out the big banks again?
A: Nobody gave you an answer to that. I'll give you an answer. Absolutely not! The biggest lie in all of politics is that Republicans are the party of the rich. The truth is, the rich do great with big government. The big banks get bigger and bigger under Dodd-Frank and community banks are going out of business.
KASICH: When a bank is ready to go under and depositors are getting ready to lose their life savings, you just don't say we believe in philosophical concerns. When there are financial crisis, you got to go there and try to fix it.
CRUZ: Yes. One of the reasons we had the financial crash is throughout the 2000s, the Federal Reserve had loose money, and then in 2008, the Fed tightened the money, which caused a cascading collapse. That's why I support getting back to rules-based monetary system not with a bunch of philosopher-kings deciding.
Q: I understand that. I just want to be clear, that millions of depositors would be on the line with that decision. If it were to happen again, for whatever the reason, you would let it go, you would let a Bank of America go?
Q: I would not bail them out, but instead of adjusting monetary policy according to whims and getting it wrong causing booms and busts, what the Fed should be doing is keeping our money tied to a stable level of gold & serving as a lender of last resort. If you have a run on the bank, the Fed can serve as a lender of last resort, but it's not a bailout. It is a loan at higher interest rates.
CRUZ: What I'd like to see on the debt limit is Republican leaders fight for something. For Pete's sakes, anything.
CRUZ: Well, look, if Hillary Clinton wants to run by telling Americans that the economy is doing great and you can credit President Obama and Hillary Clinton for that, I would encourage her to follow that strategy. Because the simple reality is, that's true for the wealthy. The top 1% under President Obama, the millionaires and billionaires that he constantly demagogued, earned a higher share for our income than any year since 1928. Those with power and influence who walk the corridors of power of the Obama administration have gotten fat and happy under big government. But I'll tell you, hardworking men and women across America are hurting. We today have the lowest labor force participation since 1978: 92 million Americans aren't working, and we've seen wages stagnate.
If you were to sit down and try to design how to hammer the living daylights out of young people, you couldn't do better than the Obama economic agenda. Under Obama, we've had five years of great stagnation, no economic growth, which means one generation, after another, can't find jobs. You know economists are referring to this generation of young people as a 'lost generation.' ObamaCare, one of the easiest ways to understand it, it's a massive wealth transfer, from young healthy people to everybody else. And then our national debt from $10 trillion dollars to $17 trillion--who the heck do you think is going to pay for that?
23 million Americans struggling for work. $16 trillion in national debt. Government takeovers of healthcare, of financial services and many aspects of our economy. Imagine, for a moment, if someone surreptitiously charged hundreds of thousands of dollars on your credit cards, saddling your kids with debts they could never escape. That's exactly the impact of this administration's misguided policies.
How do we turn things around? How do we get America back to work? President Obama thinks the answer is more and more government. Government is not the answer. You are not doing anyone a favor by creating dependency, destroying individual responsibility.
The government defines the GDP, the marquee measure of national economic output, as the market value of the goods and services produced by labor and property within the country: currently $15.6 trillion.
The gross debt is best understood in two parts: Intragovernmental debt (money owed to other government agencies, basically an internal accounting issue) plus public debt (money borrowed from outside sources, giving it more of a connection to the economy). The public debt [is about] 73% of GDP--the highest level since 1950. The gross federal debt is $15.9 trillion, counting $4.8 trillion in intragovernmental holdings. [Cruz is correct if comparing GDP to the less-meaningful gross debt]. We rate this claim as Half True.
The Contract from America, clause 3. Demand a Balanced Budget:
Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax hike.
The Contract from America, clause 6. End Runaway Government Spending:
Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth.
Christian Coalition publishes a number of special voter educational materials including the Christian Coalition Voter Guides, which provide voters with critical information about where candidates stand on important faith and family issues. The Christian Coalition Voters Guide summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution"
[The Cut-Cap-and-Balance Pledge is sponsored by a coalition of several hundred Tea Party, limited-government, and conservative organizations].
Despite our nation's staggering $14.4 trillion debt, there are many Members of the U.S. House and Senate who want to raise our nation's debt limit without making permanent reforms in our fiscal policies. We believe that this is a fiscally irresponsible position that would place America on the Road to Ruin. At the same time, we believe that the current debate over raising the debt limit provides a historic opportunity to focus public attention, and then public policy, on a path to a balanced budget and paying down our debt.
We believe that the "Cut, Cap, Balance" plan for substantial spending cuts in FY 2012, a statutory spending cap, and Congressional passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution is the minimum necessary precondition to raising the debt limit. The ultimate goal is to get us back to a point where increases in the debt limit are no longer necessary. If you agree, take the Cut, Cap, Balance Pledge!
I pledge to urge my Senators and Member of the House of Representatives to oppose any debt limit increase unless all three of the following conditions have been met:
- Cut: Substantial cuts in spending that will reduce the deficit next year and thereafter.
- Cap: Enforceable spending caps that will put federal spending on a path to a balanced budget.
- Balance: Congressional passage of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution -- but only if it includes both a spending limitation and a super-majority for raising taxes, in addition to balancing revenues and expenses.
The Club for Growth endorses economic conservatives. Their endorsement statement:
"Members of the Club are economic conservatives, like-minded political contributors who are frustrated with the ideological drift of both parties today. Club members have a shared goal of contributing to and electing more Reaganites to Congress who are willing to stand for the issues like: cutting taxes, controlling federal spending, personal accounts for Social Security, ending the death tax, eliminating the capital gains tax, fundamental tax reform, providing true school choice and minimizing government's role in our daily lives."
The Federal Reserve Transparency Act directs:
|Other candidates on Budget & Economy:||Ted Cruz on other issues:|
George P. Bush
Retiring in 2014 election:
Retired as of Jan. 2013:
Senate races Nov. 2016:
AK: Murkowski(R) vs.Begich(D) vs.Lamb(R)
AL: Shelby(R) vs.Crumpton(D) vs.Bowman(R)
AR: Boozman(R) vs.Eldridge(D) vs.Gilbert(L) vs.
AZ: McCain(R) vs.Ward(R) vs.Kirkpatrick(D) vs.Mealer(I)
CA: Sanchez(D) vs.Harris(D) vs.Chavez(R) vs.Del Beccaro(R) vs.Sundheim(R) vs.Brannon(R)
CO: Bennet(D) vs.Glenn(R) vs.Neville(R) vs.Frazier(R) vs.Keyser(R) vs.Littleton(R)
CT: Blumenthal(D) vs.Kudlow(R) vs.Wolf(R) vs.
FL: Jolly(R) vs.DeSantis(R) vs.Cantera(R) vs.Murphy(D) vs.Grayson(D) vs.Keith(D)
GA: Isakson(R) vs.
HI: Schatz(D) vs.Hanabusa(D)
IA: Grassley(R) vs.Fiegen(D) vs.Hogg(D) vs.Krause(D) vs.Culver(D)
ID: Crapo(R) vs.LaRocco(D) vs.Minnick(D)
IL: Kirk(R) vs.Harris(D) vs.Zopp(D) vs.Duckworth(D)
IN: Stutzman(R) vs.Hill(D) vs.Holcomb(R) vs.Young(R) vs.
KY: Paul(R) vs.Conway(D) vs.Chandler(D)
LA: Fleming(R) vs.Boustany(R) vs.Maness(R) vs.Kennedy(D) vs.Cao(R) vs.McAllister(R)
MD: Edwards(D) vs.Van Hollen(D) vs.Flowers(G) vs.Szeliga(R) vs.Douglas(R) vs.Steele(R)
MO: Blunt(R) vs.Kander(D)
NC: Burr(R) vs.Rey(D) vs.Ross(D) vs.Wright(R) vs.
NH: Ayotte(R) vs.Hassan(D) vs.
NV: Cortez-Masto(D) vs.Heck(R) vs.Angle(R) vs.
NY: Schumer(D) vs.King(R) vs.Gibson(R)
OH: Portman(R) vs.Strickland(D) vs.Sittenfeld(D)
OK: Lankford(R) vs.Johnson(D)
OR: Wyden(D) vs.Stine(D) vs.Callahan(R)
PA: Toomey(R) vs.Stern(R) vs.Sestak(D) vs.McGinty(D) vs.Fetterman(D)
SC: Scott(R) vs.Dickerson(D)
SD: Thune(R) vs.Herseth-Sandlin(D)
UT: Lee(R) vs.Swinton(D)
WA: Murray(D) vs.Vance(R)
WI: Johnson(R) vs.Feingold(D) vs.Lorge(R)
Senate Votes (analysis)
815 A Brazos, PMB 550, Austin, TX 78701