Donald Trump vague on how to pay for desired programs

Donald Trump dreams of big spending, but when it comes to paying for his plans, he’s tougher to pin down — often ending up pointing to waste, fraud and abuse as pots of money to be tapped.

The only problem, budget analysts say, is that while waste exists, getting at it is not as easy as Mr. Trump says.

“While there is certainly waste, fraud and abuse, in the budget, it’s one of the central myths of the campaign — mostly in the Republican primary — that our budget problems can be fixed if we just rooted out all the fraud,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and head of the Campaign to Fix the Debt.

The Trump camp did not respond to a request for comment, but watchdog groups are hoping for more clarity Thursday when the GOP presidential nominee is scheduled to deliver an address on the economy.

So far, fiscal hawks have been left with more questions than answers on the businessman’s plans to pay for his vision for Social Security, paid maternity leave and military spending — all of which, he has said, will rely on some form of cutting waste.

Rep. Steve King of Iowa said there has always been lots of talk about eliminating waste, fraud and abuse in Washington but little in the way of action, so he finds it hard to believe that Mr. Trump’s plan to offset the cost of paid maternity leave with cost savings found in the unemployment insurance program will come to fruition.

“I’m not that convinced that we can find enough fraud to pay for that,” Mr. King said Wednesday on CNN. “And if we could, we should have been using that to reduce our national debt.”

Indeed, members of both parties have complained that money is being frittered away, but little has come of it on Capitol Hill.

“Most anti-fraud measures only recover a small fraction of all improper payments, and they’re not cheap: You often need to spend money on the recovery programs,” Ms. MacGuineas said.

Part of the problem is that “there’s not a clear definition of ’waste,’ as one person’s waste is another person’s favorite program,” she added.

The disagreements over spending have played out against a backdrop of massive national deficits and a soaring national debt, which almost doubled on President George W. Bush’s watch to $10.7 trillion, and now stands at more than $19.4 trillion after nearly eight years under President Obama.

Watchdog groups generally agree that the entitlement programs that are the biggest drivers of federal spending — including Social Security and Medicare — must be reshaped to get the nation’s fiscal house in order.

The last major effort to trim spending came in 2011, when Congress agreed to lower spending and imposed strict spending caps to rein in both defense and domestic spending unless lawmakers could agree on an alternative.

Known as the budget “sequesters,” the caps have been maligned by both parties, and Mr. Trump last week said he wants to scrap the defense caps and expand the military — paying for it by, among other things, embracing “common-sense reforms that eliminate government waste and budget gimmicks.”

Even assuming he can sweat the money out, the Center for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates Mr. Trump’s plan would still add $150 billion to the debt.

Mr. Trump also says cutting waste, fraud and abuse can help stabilize Social Security without raising the retiring age or cutting benefits. But according to Social Security actuaries, such savings would yield about $3 billion — a tiny fraction of what’s needed.

“Even if you were able to stop all improper payments, you’d buy about four months of solvency,” Ms. MacGuineas said.

On Tuesday Mr. Trump went to the waste well again, saying he would end fraud and improper payments in unemployment insurance and use the savings to provide paid maternity leave for women.

“I am all for getting rid of waste and fraud, but am not sure there is enough waste and fraud and abuse in unemployment compensation to pay for this,” said Ben Gitis, director of labor market policy at the American Action Forum, a center-right issue advocacy group. “My primary concern with this way of funding it is that he will have to take benefits away from unemployment compensation.”

Mr. Gitis’ group has projected the Trump plan would carry an annual price tag of more than $7 billion if the federal government picked up the employees’ entire salary during their leave.

Meanwhile, a 2012 analysis from the St. Louis Federal Reserve found about $3.3 billion in improper unemployment insurance payments in 2011.

David Fuller, a co-author of that report and economics professor at University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, told The Times in an email Wednesday the most recent fraud numbers have sunk below $1 billion.