30 Issues: The Deficit

True/False: The Deficit Is The Ultimate Issue

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Nan Hayworth, Republican candidate for Congress in NY's 19th district, then Patrick Garofalo, economics researcher and blogger at the Center for American Progress, discuss the importance of the deficit in this year's midterm elections.


Patrick Garofalo and Nan Hayworth

Comments [61]

a g from n j

hayworth is for corporate facism.

Oct. 13 2010 01:28 AM
a g from n j

the absurdity of a conversation with this woman. does brian think she makes sense,or is he being polite to her for the sake of radio decorum. she is hypocrisy on steroids..............

Oct. 13 2010 01:25 AM
jawbone from Parsippany

WNYC Web Master:

With comment threads this long, it would be good to have the comments numbered so that people could more easily reference previous comments.

Of course, HTML tags and things like Reply nesting, even Edit, would be oh so nice....

Oct. 12 2010 04:06 PM

I kept waiting for Brian to ask Nan H whether she would budget got poor houses and debtors' prisons. We're going to need them with her approach.

With her plan, we will go into a depression -- and then what?

Hurry up and die, poor folks?

Oct. 12 2010 04:03 PM
j from bklyn

forgot re: richard koo comment below - why is it that business' getting practically free money from the reserve are not being properly incentivized to use it for jobs instead of being allowed to buy their own stock back to raise it's value instead?
does any 'politician' have a decent answer for the taxpayers on this one?

Oct. 12 2010 01:52 PM
j from bklyn

interesting comment by richard koo @ yesterday. American business is buying back their own company stock in order to raise it's value, instead of investing in jobs/hiring. Koo indicates that the amount that business' are holding is the amount the gov't needs to spend as a stimulus. This is the first time I've heard any real number assessments, and I'd like to hear what the candidates have to say on this. I've not heard how much money would be saved paying down the deficit now, would compare to creating a larger taxpayer base in five years, say, when longer term employment stability has finally kicked back in for real.

As for the health care plan, I don't understand how a more organized nat'l plan is not seen as part of nat'l security in the age of [bio]terrorism, for many of the paranoid right-wingers. Again, does anybody's HMO cover anthrax, seriously? Also, how flu, food borne problems [looking at you, salmonella...] also travel more efficiently. Maybe paranoia and isolationist self-redundancy go hand-in-hand.

Finally, lack of investment in R&D started back w/ Reaganomics, by favoring the finance industry. This country has a LOT of catching up to do. Clinton got lucky with desktop computers, but now we need an energy grid w/ more complex self-sufficient solar/thermal/fuel cell adaptations, and a nat'l highway system w/ battery charging/changing stations built into the infrastructure, to maintain any sort of dominance in a globalized capital marketplace. I want to say "duh." here, but I know I'm preaching to the choir.

Oct. 12 2010 01:47 PM

Martin Chuzzlewit
"moving to texas." GOOD, can i help!

Oct. 12 2010 12:08 PM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

Missed the show, but scanning the posts to get a sense of it is a hoot.

I never fully appreciated how many LEFT WING LOONIES there are in New York.
The posters here are paranoid, cynical and, hopelessly predictable. The evil rich, the evil corporations, blah, blah blah.
What a "progressive" farce.

I'm moving to Texas.

Oct. 12 2010 12:03 PM
Bonita Rothman from Staten Island

The deficit that this candidate is running on is the same deficit that eight years of Republican economic policy ran up. So, we should continue to follow their policies hoping that they will solve the problems? They started two wars that they paid for by borrowing from China; they continue to provide agribusiness and other businesses with corporate welfare; they oversaw the move of jobs and manufacturing to low labor cost nations. (Buy anything today and it is produced in China. So we can't spend our way out of this because our money simply goes to other nations!)

In today's world Republican support of business actually means support of global businesses. Thus, the more you support business through tax dollars the more you hollow out your manufacturing and support other countries. Not only that, but in today's world labor is movable and goes where the jobs, are or as in tech business the business travels on the internet: X-rays can be read in Bombay as well as here, and make no mistake, India and China produce more people capable of doing this high tech stuff than we do simply by virtue of their greater populations.

Cutting back on social support systems will do absolutely nothing to address the assbackwards economic policies that brought about the collapse of Wall St. etc. We no longer have the manufacturing jobs to support our citizens nor our projection of power through our armed forces, and nothing presently "offered" by Republicans addresses any of these problems -- which they helped to create and which their refusal to work with Democrats in Congress simply makes worse.

Oct. 12 2010 11:49 AM
Chris from Putnam Valley

Friends, neighbors, and loved ones are moving out of their homes because of school taxes, not because of the deficit!

School taxes have risen so much because of uncontrolled development which brings in more students than are affordable by property tax payers.

Development has no question been steadily promoted by Republicans. Development is the main reason for property taxes rising. It has steadily been Democrats that have tried to constrain development to keep property taxes under control and save our towns that we call home.

Hayworth trusts the markets to control health care on their own! I trust government more, we have some say in that. Private markets have one mission...profits.

What a babbling bunch of nonsense.

Oct. 12 2010 11:40 AM

to be fair to ms hayworth, she is an eye doctor not an economist. her people should have booked her for a medical segment, not this one.

Oct. 12 2010 11:36 AM

The "compassionate" "progressive" governments lead by Bush and Obama ended up subsidizing the inexcusably bad investment decisions of private, but well connected, actors.
"Too big to fail"? or "Too big" "Too connected" "Too close to my personal interests" to be allowed to fail."
But gee, if we didn't take care of these large interests the country would be mired in economic crisis, high unemployment, and increasing poverty.
I guess we did the correct thing after all.
(Remember what happened in Japan.)

Let's just relax and have another cup of tea.

Oct. 12 2010 11:35 AM
Daniel from Manhattan

Reducing the size of the Government seems to play well with some people but who is going to step into the power vacuum that would be created? Obviously corporate power which is already somewhat out of control. The Government with all its faults offer a measure of democracy. corporate rule does not.

Oct. 12 2010 11:33 AM

Brian -- when you talk to these deficit hawks and they go on about how we're burdening our children and grandchildren in debt -- would you please ask them how not fixing our deteriorationg infrastructure, not expanding transportation options and not finding new sources of energy is going to make their lives better. The longer we put off dealing with these essential issues for our society -- kicking the can downt he road -- the more costly it will be for future generations to solve these problems. No one is dealing with these issues honestly. It is impossible in this hyperbolic and irrational political climate to deal with these issues rationally.

Oct. 12 2010 11:33 AM
Top Cat from USA

NOW you're talking -- talking points!

Republicans want HAND-OUTS to the RICH while our soldiers DIE in Iraq and Afghanistan.

that's it? three minutes with the "Think Progress" guy, and only one point of any substance? Is that why you're called "Bend over Brian"?

Oct. 12 2010 11:32 AM

The deficits and overall debt will not be reduced until the American standard of living is reduced. There are no "quick fixes" based on borrowing as there were in the past. The country will be FORCED by economic realities, to desuburbanize, reurbanize, and radically reduce energy consumption. All other fiscal smoke and mirror fixes are illusory. Harsh economic realities are going to make the real decisions, not the politicians.

Oct. 12 2010 11:32 AM
amalgam from Manhattan by day, NJ by night

At least Garofalo is laying out a proposal, although, as you both acknowledge, he isn't running for anything...

Oct. 12 2010 11:31 AM

I am infinitely more terrified of private corporate takeover than government takeover.

Oct. 12 2010 11:30 AM
Rudy from Queens

market mechanisms? what nonsense. So much vagueness. Her voice, tone and platitudes give her away as a big Rush L. fan.

Oct. 12 2010 11:30 AM

You know, I don't see this discussion as a bad thing. I mean, yeah, Hayworth is spouting nonsense, but I think people can think for themselves, and Brian does a great job at asking the interviewees challenging questions and providing multiple perspectives. I don't like this "ban right-wing propaganda from WNYC," business. Extremely short-sighted, and I'd rather hear the wingnuts have to explain and debate their positions. Get a grip, this isn't the OReilly Factor.

Oct. 12 2010 11:29 AM
michelle from NY

" A long and thoughful discussion about what needs to be done". An elegant way of saying 'we really don't have, or want, a solution".

Oct. 12 2010 11:26 AM
Walter from NYC

BAN ALL RIGHT-WING and REPUBLICAN propagandists from WNYC!

Oct. 12 2010 11:26 AM
teal from pomona

Nan Haworth, you just reinforced my determination to send a further dontion to the campaing of John Hall.

Oct. 12 2010 11:25 AM
Sam from NJ

Granted I'm from NJ, but I've listened to this segment and for the life of me, haven't come away with an understanding of a single thing this candidate stands for. What a waste of air time and what a shame for the voters of that district.

Oct. 12 2010 11:25 AM
Jennifer Hickey from Flushing

This lady has nothing to offer. Let's just undo everything. Same old line.

Oct. 12 2010 11:25 AM
Josh from Williamsburg

Ms. Hayworth,

You mention that Obama is cutting hundreds of millions from Medicare. Those of us who actually pay attention know that this is coming through new efficiencies, not through cuts in service. Do you simply not believe this to be possible? Or are you intentionally misleading your voters? You should really be more forthright on this issue.

Oct. 12 2010 11:24 AM
Maryann L from Highland, NY

Where were these people when Bush created the current deficit on a war initiated under false pretenses? It's okay if it's for killing, but not health care?

Oct. 12 2010 11:24 AM

NY19th district is a swing district. send some money john hall.

Oct. 12 2010 11:24 AM
amalgam from Manhattan by day, NJ by night

I can believe your serious about the deficit/debt if you consider BOTH:

tax increases


cut in spending.

Then and only then...

Oct. 12 2010 11:24 AM

Was this woman really the only person willing to talk about this?

Oct. 12 2010 11:24 AM
mark from Croton, NY

Re: BL's ? prefaced with what economists' consensus on what needs to be reduced to balance budget, Hayworth was evasive, and ignored the premise. Obviously, uneducated on the issues and a parrot for right-wing Republican demagoguery for benefit of the lowest common denominator. I'm fr/ 19th CD.

Oct. 12 2010 11:22 AM
Billy Gray from Greenpoint

Real people do not really give a crap about the deficit, they just see it as a sign of malfeasance, and don't understand it thanks to ideologically driven folks like Hayworth spreading disinformation about how deficit spending works, especially in such a trouble economy.

People have no money to buy stuff, and they have no jobs, and that's numero uno. The reason there are no jobs is because there is no demand. You need massive stimulus now, or we're in for a very long lost decade, and instituting structural unemployment. People like Hayworth pedaling this fix-the-deficit-now nonsense are truly un-serious, and have no place in our public discourse.

In fact, maybe that's what Hayworth would prefer, to create a permanent, unemployable underclass in this country?

Oct. 12 2010 11:21 AM
Walterr from nyc

OMG, idly turn on WNYC, and get a blast of republican propaganda!

The people in this country are mercilessly blasted with right-wing lies -- we have to get this from WNYC?

WNYC should have 24-hour progressive programming!

What is it, "National Public Radio," since half the country is stupid, you're having 50 percent bullhockey?

Oct. 12 2010 11:21 AM

as of about 15 minutes into her segment, Ms. Hayworth has said absolutely nothing. Just sound bites. No qualification to anything. Just vague stabs at the common Tea / Repub talking points. How about dollars and cents? WHERE would she save the money? Sadly, the typical right wing candidate of today...

Oct. 12 2010 11:21 AM
Edward from NJ

Can the Brian Lehrer Show get a morning-zoo-style-wacky-sound-effect that will go off every time a Republican claims that addressing "waste, fraud and abuse" will make a dent in the deficit?

Oct. 12 2010 11:21 AM
steve from middletown

Would you please ask this no-nothing why she insists on spreading this disinformation about the economy? Ask her what major federal programs have started since Obama took office. Ask her why taxes are going up if 40% of the Recovery Act came from tax cuts and a bilk to aid state and local governments? What would she do specifically? Privatize soc sec?

Oct. 12 2010 11:20 AM


Oct. 12 2010 11:20 AM
RJ from Fairfield County, CT

Nan Hayworth says tax payers don't benefit from TARP. My husband has been out of work for 6 months. Thanks to TARP our COBRA payments were lowered by 65%. Our family could not have survived this long without TARP. The Washington Post reported last week that of the 159,000 public sector jobs lost in September, 76,000 were local government workers (including teachers). This deficit obsession works against the recovery.

Oct. 12 2010 11:20 AM
Caroline Shaw from Kew Gardens

I've been paying money into social security and medicare my whole life. That money has been coming out of my paychecks, and now that I'm retired I deserve to get my fair share back. If the government wants to balance the budget they should just shut down the never-ending wars in the middle east.

Oct. 12 2010 11:20 AM
amalgam from Manhattan by day, NJ by night

Also omitted are the potential benefits and net plus to the economy of new cost-saving programs not yet underway in the health care bill.

Tit for tat.

Oct. 12 2010 11:20 AM


Oct. 12 2010 11:19 AM
Steve from Manhattan

George Bush raised the deficit by 5 Trillion dollars ( due to tax cuts to billionaire (25% cut in capital gains tax) and huge increases in Defense Department spending. If we are going to cut the deficit, we need to pair down the defense budget. We can no longer afford to be the world's policeman. There is 150 Billion for new weapons systems (look at the federal budget on treasury website) .
Unemployment is huge due to republican pushing for NAFTA and sending jobs to Mexico and China.
Blaming the health law is a lie. Health care costs are out of control because of the costs of private health insurance and private health corporations.

Oct. 12 2010 11:19 AM
mike from NYC

This is just an ideologue's rambling along her predigested talking points. If the crash of 1929 had occurred at the same point in the election cycle as the crash of 2008, FDR would have been reviled and lost the congress in the next mid-term and the US would either still be in depression or we would have been divided up between Germany, Italy and Japan because the US economy would not have been able to arm the world against the Fascist and NAZI threats.

What this country needs is a constitutional amendment to guarantee us the god-given right to die in the street of treatable illnesses!

Oct. 12 2010 11:18 AM
CL from NEw York

How many more times do we have to listen to some tiresome politician utter rank opinion about economic matters without the least reference to hard data to support it? Merely referring to what "the taxpayers" think about the government's actions to address economic problems is little more than pandering. And BL simply lets her assertions go answered. Isn't there any staff available who can actually research the issues? If anyone is truly interested in these matters, then I suggest that they consult a respectable economist, such as Paul Krugman. Listening to some blabbermouth Republican candidate is not going to yield any credible insight.

Oct. 12 2010 11:18 AM
amalgam from Manhattan by day, NJ by night

So what was Ms. Hayworth's solution to the unprecedented and near collapse of the entire economy - led by the blow-up of the financial sector? We need at least an alternative theoretical model proposed by her, otherwise she is merely spouting rhetoric, which is what she is currently doing.

The other thing is what is her characterization of the 2008 meltdown? It sounds like she thinks that it was a relatively "normal" downturn and not one of the worst financial/economic occurrences in modern history.

Oct. 12 2010 11:18 AM
gary g from nyc

candidate Hayworth is an IDIOT !!

Oct. 12 2010 11:17 AM
Matt from Rockland

This woman, Anne Hayworth, in my opinion doesnt know what shes talking about.

Oct. 12 2010 11:16 AM
John from Fanwood

No it is not. Money is as cheap as it ever has been, and an NPR report today said that our debt is around one percent of GDP. The debt issue, like taxes, is a smokescreen for a complete lack of ideas from the Tea Party and the right. We should ask them why burdening our children with debt is worse than leaving them with air they can’t breath. They call any climate legislation a tax.

Oct. 12 2010 11:16 AM

She's really struggling to fit events into her folksy right-wing dogma. It's painful.

Oct. 12 2010 11:15 AM
JP from NJ

If overspending truly is the issue, please ask all your guests where the hell have they been for the last 20+ years? This is such a load of crap its not even funny… Is the real reason we are where we are because for the last 15 years anyone and their brother could get a credit card, a new car and even a new house with no or next to no credit themselves? And high taxes? Please ask you guest speaking right now just how much has her taxes gone up over the last 15 years or so? Stop with crying higher taxes that no one is actually paying!!!!

Oct. 12 2010 11:15 AM

The stimulus enabled me and my spouse to move BACK to New York thanks to the first-time home buyer's credit. We now pay far more taxes than we did when we moved somewhere affordable because we both found jobs, unlike in the boonies in another state! We are only two data points, but it seems like it worked to me.

Oct. 12 2010 11:14 AM

10 years ago the financial (and environmental) Deficit was THE issue -- because we had a one time mass of wealth that could either be saved or lost.

It was lost. Today's deficit is actually no longer the emergency that it was then. That problem went out of control, eventually bearing today's multitude of issues.

As always, deficits continue to be a superb measure of one's level of discipline, self-honesty, consideration of one's offspring, and general competence.

Oct. 12 2010 11:14 AM
JD from Somerset, NJ

Where was Nan Hayworth when the Bush administration felt deficits didn't matter and let the government grow and paid for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq outside of the normal budget which actually did more to raise the deficit? I agree with Paul Krugman: During good times you need to control the deficit, but during hard times you need to ensure that jobs are being created even with taxpayer money.

Oct. 12 2010 11:14 AM
Teal from Pomona

I'm from the 19th congressional district.
the Canard that deficit spending and tax cuts to business helping jobs is belied by the fact that corporations are awash in money now, and they are parking it in buying back their own stock and bonuses NOT in providing new jobs. Nan Haworth is drinking the GOP Kookaid

Oct. 12 2010 11:13 AM

ask her what she is willing to cut

Oct. 12 2010 11:12 AM

The reality is that the WHOLE WESTERN WORLD is in deficit (and that includes Japan as well) due to the rise of Asia, mainly China and India and the other rapidly growing Asian sates that we liberated from communism.

The western world deficit implies that the western standard of living is going to flatten out and remain stagnant for decades to come.

The US deficit is not as bad as some others.
It is a problem, but it is not a mortal problem.
It means that standards of living have to come down to a realistic level, and that bothers Americans who thought that there is no other direction but up. That myth has crashed to earth. What it means is smaller houses, more apartments, and less energy consumption. That is returning to a prior standard of living we thought we left behind decades ago. But what goes up, invariably has to come back down to earth.

Oct. 12 2010 11:12 AM
Greg from Williamsburg

The federal deficit was a progressive issue before it was a "Tea Party" issue. The Center for American Progress has been trying to raise awareness about the dangers of deficit spending since at least the first Bush administration.

Oct. 12 2010 11:11 AM

trade deficit and over-reliance on consumer spending to drive the economy may be just as serious.

the how big a problem the deficit poses is inversly proportional to our ability to pay it down.

dwindling manufacturing base and over-reliance on heavily subsidized crops for exports are at least as serious. we probably should be making more, selling more, buying less.

Oct. 12 2010 11:09 AM

bring back my tax dollars!!
will she vote to end the corn subsidies?
the midwest gets a lot of federal aid. all that socialism has brought the midwest the lowest unemployment rates in the country.

why should my federal tax dollars aid these red states
(United States currently pays around $20 billion per year to farmers in direct subsidies as "farm income stabilization")

Oct. 12 2010 10:59 AM
Sam from Downtown NYC

Do we really think the Albany legistors think long term, or even realistically? Like the "national" deficit, they all don't think that way. Imagine their own households run on a deficit basis? Can they survive? Will they be expecting money to fall from heaven next year, and the year after...?

Oct. 12 2010 10:52 AM
AL from NJ

Deficit is a one year budget concept, not a multi-year management concept. You would not take on a mortgage without considering long-term financial implications. How does state government budgeting reflect long-term financial planning?

Oct. 12 2010 10:30 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.