Chris Wallace’s interview with David Plouffe on Fox News Sunday suggests an administration that’s afraid to argue for what it really wants, isn’t sure what to say it really wants, and isn’t saying anything very well. During the course of the interview, Plouffe incorporated many of the administration’s favorite rhetorical expressions. He talked about the need to “win the future.” He used the need to use “a scalpel, not a machete” to cut spending. And he talked about the need for “a balanced approach” (not to be confused with balancing the books). But he also made at least two more specific claims that merit rebuttal.

Wallace noted that President Obama’s 2012 budget doesn’t address runaway entitlement spending. Plouffe replied, “Well, first, on the 2012 budget, that would be a trillion dollars in deficit reduction over the next decade, lowest level of domestic spending since Dwight Eisenhower.” The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), however, says (see Table 1) that Obama’s 2012 budget would increase deficit spending by $9.5 trillion over the next decade, which is $2.7 trillion more than deficit spending would be even under current trajectories.  That’s a far cry from $1 trillion in deficit reduction.