SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
July, 23 2010, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Dan Beeton, 202-239-1460
New Report Suggests Stimulus Better for Spanish Economy, Debt Burden, Than Austerity
A new report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) shows that Spain, under pressure to cut spending and raise taxes while its economy is barely recovering, might be better off with a continued stimulus.
WASHINGTON
A new from the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) shows that Spain, under pressure to cut spending and raise taxes while its economy is barely recovering, might be better off with a continued stimulus.
"The planned budget cuts and tax increases in Spain are not only unnecessary, but socially and economically destructive," said economist Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director of CEPR and lead author of the report, "Alternatives to Fiscal Austerity in Spain". "They also could easily leave Spain with a worse debt problem than they would have with a continued fiscal stimulus."
Spain's unemployment rate has shot up from 8.5 percent in 2007 to more than 20 percent today after the collapse of large housing and stock market bubbles. The paper shows that the bursting of these bubbles, and the resulting collapse of private demand, is the cause of Spain's current economic and budget problems - not government overspending.
The report argues that continued fiscal stimulus could be financed by the European Central Bank, through money creation, much as the U.S. Federal reserve has done over the past three years, and the Bank of Japan has done since the 1990s. Even if financed through ordinary borrowing, the projections in the paper find that Spain's debt-to-GDP ratio would not end up much higher in 2020 if the government continued a stimulus over the next two years, than under the current planned fiscal tightening.
The report provides projections for scenarios in which the fiscal tightening leads to slower growth and, therefore, higher borrowing costs for the government. These lead to higher debt-to-GDP ratios than would occur under a continued stimulus program.
"With these depression-level unemployment rates, the government's first priority should be creating and maintaining employment, not fiscal tightening," said Weisbrot.
The Executive Summary follows:
Executive Summary
This paper looks at the planned austerity measures in Spain, the rationale for the spending cuts and tax increases, likely outcomes for future debt-to-GDP ratios, and the probable results of alternative policies.
It is widely believed that Spain got into trouble because of the over-expansion of government spending. However, during the economic expansion from 2000-2007, the gross debt-to-GDP ratio declined sharply, from 59.3 to 36.2 percent of GDP. In 2009, interest payments on Spain's debt were just 1.8 percent of GDP, a modest interest burden. Net debt had declined to 26.5 percent of GDP in 2007.
Net debt is a better measure of the country's debt burden than gross debt, because interest that is paid on debt held by the government accrues to the government, and therefore does not represent a burden on government finances. In this paper we will use both figures, because the gross debt figures are most commonly cited in the press.
The cause of Spain's current debt problems, as well as its unemployment and weak recovery, was thus not an over-expansion of government but the collapse of private demand. The country had built up a large housing bubble that began to collapse in 2007, at the same time that the economy was hit with external shocks from the world recession. Between 2000 and 2006, construction increased from 7.5 percent of GDP to a peak of 10.8 percent. Since the collapse, housing starts have fallen by more than 87 percent from their peak.
Spain also suffered from the collapse of an enormous stock market bubble: the stock market peaked at 125 percent of GDP in November 2007 and dropped to 54 percent of GDP a year later. The wealth effect of this huge drop in stock values would be expected to be very large, in the range of a 1.3 - 1.75 percent fall-off in GDP.
Unemployment has risen from 8.5 percent to over 20 percent, and is projected to be at 15.5 percent at the end of 2013.
For an alternative to current pro-cyclical policies, we consider two versions of a continued fiscal stimulus, amounting to 3.9 percent of GDP over the next two years, as compared to the baseline scenario.
In the first alternative, the European Central Bank (ECB) buys debt equal to 4 percent of GDP annually over two years. This would be done with an agreement to refund the interest payments on the debt to the Spanish government.
Although the ECB and European authorities - which currently includes the IMF for these decisions - would be unlikely to carry out this policy, it is important to illustrate because it shows that there is a simple, feasible alternative to present policies that does not lead to an unsustainable debt burden. In this case, the net debt-to-GDP ratio increases to just 60.5 percent of GDP in 2020, as compared to 64.3 percent of GDP in the baseline scenario based on the government's projections.
The feasibility of such an approach must be emphasized. The U.S. Federal Reserve has added more than one trillion dollars to its balance sheet - thus more than doubling it - since the U.S. recession began. There has been no threat to inflation resulting from this money creation. The Bank of Japan has financed trillions of dollars of debt since the 1990s by creating money, with the result that there is a more than 100 percentage point (of GDP) difference between the government's gross and net debt; and yet inflation has been extremely low in Japan over the past 20 years and sometimes negative. Consumer price inflation in Europe is currently at about one percent.
In the second alternative, the continued stimulus is the same size but is financed through regular borrowing, rather than money creation by the ECB as described above. In this scenario the net debt is significantly higher, increasing to 68.3 percent of GDP by 2020. It is worth noting, however, that this is just four percentage points higher than the government's baseline scenario.
The government currently plans budget cuts and tax increases, which it projects will stabilize the gross debt-to-GDP ratio at 69 percent of GDP by 2013 (net debt at 62.4 percent). However, there are many historical examples in which growth turned out to be seriously overestimated when procyclical policies were implemented. For example, Ireland began reducing its fiscal deficit at the end of 2008. At the time, the IMF projected 1 percent growth for 2009; the actual result was negative 10 percent.
Furthermore, if the planned pro-cyclical policies result in slower growth or push the economy back into recession, this could cause the interest rate on new debt for Spain to rise. In this paper we look at three scenarios that incorporate a lower growth projection, with interest rates of 6, 7, and 8 percent on Spain's debt. In these scenarios, Spain's gross debt-to-GDP ratio rises to 85.5, 90.6, and 96.1 percent of GDP, respectively, by 2020. Net debt rises to 76.6, 81.7, and 87.2 percent of GDP, respectively.
Thus, there are plausible scenarios under which the planned pro-cyclical policies can lead to much higher debt levels than would result from the continuation of a moderate fiscal stimulus. Even from the point of view of avoiding unsustainable debt accumulation, the risk of a prolonged stagnation - combined with higher interest rates - may be much greater than the risks associated with countercyclical fiscal policy at present. And the alternative, feasible counter-cyclical policies would avoid much of the social and economic costs of lost output and prolonged high unemployment that Spain currently faces.
Keep reading...Show less
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380LATEST NEWS
Sanders Says 'Not Another Penny' for ICE Until Kristi Noem, Stephen Miller Are Gone
Sen. Bernie Sanders also demanded "fundamental reforms" to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, saying they are "terrorizing" US communities.
Jan 29, 2026
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Wednesday demanded the removal of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller—a key architect of President Donald Trump's violent mass deportation campaign—as well as concrete reforms in exchange for any new funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In remarks on the Senate floor, Sanders (I-Vt.) called ICE a "domestic military force" that is "terrorizing" communities across the country. The senator pointed specifically to the agency's ongoing activities in Minnesota and Maine, where officers have committed horrific—and deadly—abuses.
Sanders said that "not another penny should be given" to ICE or Customs and Border Protection (CBP) "unless there are fundamental reforms in how those agencies function—and until there is new leadership at the Department of Homeland Security and among those who run our immigration policy." The senator has proposed repealing a $75 billion ICE funding boost that the GOP approved last summer, an end to warrantless arrests, the unmasking of ICE and CBP agents, and more.
"To be clear, Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller must go," Sanders said Wednesday, condemning the administration's attempts to smear Renee Good and Alex Pretti, US citizens who were killed this month by federal agents in Minneapolis.
Watch Sanders' full remarks, which placed ICE atrocities in the context of Trump's broader "movement toward authoritarianism":
Sanders' speech came as the Senate is weighing a package of six appropriation bills that includes a DHS bill with over $64 billion in funding—with $10 billion earmarked for ICE. Democrats have called for separating the DHS measure from the broader package and pushed reforms to ICE as a condition for passage.
Punchbowl reported Thursday morning that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and the Trump White House are "negotiating a framework to pass five of the six outstanding FY2026 funding bills, as well as a stopgap measure for the Department of Homeland Security," ahead of a possible government shutdown at the end of the week.
"Under this framework, Congress would pass a short-term DHS patch to allow for negotiations to continue over new limits on ICE and CBP agents as they implement President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown," the outlet added. "If Schumer and the White House come to an agreement, there would still likely be a funding lapse over the weekend. The House, which is slated to return Monday, would have to pass the five-bill spending package and the DHS stopgap."
In addition to demanding ICE reforms, a growing number of congressional Democrats are calling for Noem's ouster as DHS chief in the wake of Pretti's killing. Noem falsely claimed Pretti "arrived at the scene" in Minneapolis "to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement." Noem has attempted to blame Miller—who also smeared Pretti—for the lie.
More than three-quarters of the House Democratic caucus is now backing articles of impeachment against Noem, accusing her of obstruction of Congress, violation of the public trust, and self-dealing. Trump has thus far rejected calls to remove Noem, saying they "have a very good relationship."
"The two agents who shot and killed Alex Pretti are now on leave, but Trump still backs Noem instead of firing her," Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), the leader of the impeachment push, said late Wednesday. "I’m leading 174 members with articles of impeachment against Noem. The public is crying out for change. Enough is enough."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Thug' Marco Rubio Tells Senate How US Plans to Keep Stealing Venezuelan Oil
"Rubio's dangerously expansive vision to transform the United States into a colonizing power in the Americas must be challenged," one watchdog leader said of the US secretary of state.
Jan 28, 2026
In addition to asserting that "there is no war against Venezuela," despite US forces killing scores of people there while abducting its president earlier this month, Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday laid out for a Senate panel how the Trump administration intends to continue controlling the South American nation's oil and related profits.
Legal experts have argued that US President Donald Trump's blockade of Venezuela's oil, abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores—who have both pleaded not guilty to federal narco-terrorism charges—and bombings of boats allegedly smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean all violate international law.
"The ongoing military actions in the Caribbean and South America, including the abduction of Venezuela's president, are wrong, illegal under US and international law, and unconstitutional," Robert Weissman, co-president of the group Public Citizen, said before the Senate hearing. "Congressional Republicans have blocked war powers resolutions that would end the US aggression in Venezuela, an extremely dangerous abdication of congressional responsibility to check presidential unlawfulness."
"Marco Rubio's central role in the planning and execution of the scheme to violate the sovereignty of Venezuela and steal the country's oil merits a deep investigation by Congress, and potentially the removal of Rubio as secretary of state," Weissman continued. "Rubio's dangerously expansive vision to transform the United States into a colonizing power in the Americas must be challenged."
Testifying to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee—on which he previously served—Rubio said that "Maduro is an indicted drug trafficker, not a legal head of state," described his abduction as "an operation to aid law enforcement," and declared that "the United States is prepared to help oversee Venezuela's transition from a criminal state to a responsible partner."
Rubio, the acting national security adviser, insisted that Trump wasn't planning for any more military action in Venezuela—but also would not rule out such action, potentially without congressional authorization, in "self-defense" against an "imminent" threat.
Trump has repeatedly made clear through public statements that his Venezuela policy is focused on its petroleum reserves, seemingly to enrich the fossil fuel leaders who helped him return to power. American forces have seized several tankers in the Caribbean Sea linked to the country—which critics have condemned as "piracy"—and the first US sale of Venezuelan oil went to the company of a trader who donated millions to the president's 2024 campaign, which Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) last week called "yet another example of his unchecked corruption."
Describing US control of Venezuela's nationalized petroleum industry, Rubio told the committee:
Objective number one was stability... And one of the tools that's available to us is the fact that we have sanctions on oil. There is oil that is sanctioned that cannot move from Venezuela because of our quarantine. And so what we did is we entered into an arrangement with them, and the arrangement is this: On the oil that is sanctioned and quarantined, we will allow you to move it to market. We will allow you to move it to market at market prices—not at the discount China was getting. In return, the funds from that will be deposited into an account that we will have oversight over, and you will spend that money for the benefit of the Venezuelan people...
This is not going to be the permanent mechanism, but this is a short-term mechanism in which the needs of the Venezuelan people can be met through a process that we've created, where they will submit every month a budget of this is what we need funded. We will provide for them at the front end what that money cannot be used for. And they have been very cooperative in this regard. In fact, they have pledged to use a substantial amount of those funds to purchase medicine and equipment directly from the United States.
In an exchange with Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Rubio said that an "audit process" has not yet been set up but will be, adding that "we've only made one payment" and it "retrospectively will be audited, but it was important we made that payment because they had to meet payroll. They had to keep sanitation workers, police officers, government workers on staff."
Shaheen noted that the oil reportedly sold for $500 million, but only $300 million went to Venezuela's government, now led by Maduro's former deputy, Delcy Rodríguez, and asked Rubio about the remaining $200 million. The secretary said that the rest of the money was in a temporary account in Qatar that will ultimately become a US Treasury blocked account.
Summarizing the Trump administration's plans, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said: "I think the scope of the project that you are undertaking in Venezuela is without precedent. You are taking their oil at gunpoint; you are holding and selling that oil; putting, for now, the receipts in an offshore Middle Eastern account; you're deciding how and for what purposes that money is gonna be used in a country of 30 million people. I think a lot of us believe that that is destined for failure."
Highlighting that "a month later, we have no information on a timetable for a democratic transition, Maduro's people are still in charge, most of the political prisoners are in jail—and by the way, those that have been let out have a gag order on them from the government—the opposition leader is still in exile," Murphy added, "this looks, already, like it is a failure."
At one point during the nearly three-hour hearing, Leonardo Flores, a Venezuelan-American with the anti-war group CodePink, shouted, "Marco Rubio, you and Trump are thugs!"
US Capitol Police removed Flores from the hearing. As he was being led away, the protester said that "sanctions are a form of collective punishment of Venezuelan citizens. That's a war crime. Hands off Venezuela! Hands off Cuba!"
Asked by Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) on Wednesday, "Will you make a public commitment today to rule out US regime change in Cuba," Rubio—the son of Cuban immigrants—replied: "Regime change? Oh no, I think we would like to see the regime there change. That doesn't mean that we're gonna to make a change, but we would love to see a change. There's no doubt about the fact that it would be of great benefit to the United States if Cuba was no longer governed by an autocratic regime."
Since the abduction operation, there have been "free Maduro" protests in both Venezuela and Cuba, which lost 32 citizens in the Trump administration's attack on Caracas. Speaking to thousands of people gathered outside the US Embassy in Havana earlier this month, Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel said that "the current US administration has opened the door to an era of barbarism, plunder, and neo-fascism."
"No one here surrenders," he continued, taking aim at not only Trump but also Rubio. "The current emperor of the White House and his infamous secretary of state haven't stopped threatening me."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'She's Lying': Journalist Exposes Secret Watch Lists That Trump Official Says Don't Exist
"If we don’t explore more why all of these secret lists exist," one US intelligence officer said, there could be "even more of an environment of paranoia on the ground and more tragic killings.”
Jan 28, 2026
Despite denials from a senior Trump administration official, secret watchlists of Americans are being used by federal agencies to track and categorize US citizens—especially protesters, activists, and critics of law enforcement—as “domestic terrorists," investigative journalist Ken Klippenstein reported Wednesday.
Klippenstein said that two senior national security officials speaking on condition of anonymity told him that there are over a dozen "secret and obscure" watchlists that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI are using to track anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and pro-Palestine protesters, antifa-affiliated individuals, and "others who are promiscuously labeled 'domestic terrorists.'"
"I can reveal for the first time," he wrote, "that some of the secret lists and applications go by codenames like Bluekey, Grapevine, Hummingbird, Reaper, Sandcastle, Sienna, Slipstream, and Sparta (including the ominous sounding HEL-A and HEL-C reports generated by Sparta)."
"Some of these, like Hummingbird, were created to vet and track immigrants, in this case Afghans seeking to settle in the United States," Klippenstein explained. "Slipstream is a classified social media repository. Others are tools used to link people on the streets together, including collecting on friends and families who have nothing to do with any purported lawbreaking."
"There’s practically nothing available that further describes what these watchlists do, how large they are, or what they entail," he added.
Klippenstein's revelation seemingly flies in the face of DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin's recent denial that the administration has a database containing the names of people accused of domestic terrorism.
"There's just one problem: She's lying," wrote Klippenstein.
🚨 I've obtained a list of secret watchlists the Department of Homeland Security uses to keep tabs on American citizenswww.kenklippenstein.com/p/ices-secre...
[image or embed]
— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein.bsky.social) January 28, 2026 at 1:07 PM
Many observers already thought as much, especially after a masked federal enforcer taunted an anti-ICE protester in Maine by telling her that "we have a nice little database, and now you’re considered a domestic terrorist."
White House "border czar" Tom Homan—who was recently sent to Minnesota to oversee the anti-immigrant blitz following the departure of Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino amid outrage over the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti—also said this month that "we’re going to create a database where those people that are arrested for interference, impeding, and assault, we’re going to make them famous."
Reporting Tuesday that Pretti—the nurse who was disarmed and then shot dead by federal enforcers in Minneapolis last week—was known to Trump officials after a previous encounter in which agents broke his rib raised further questions about government watchlists.
"We came out of 9/11 with the notion that we would have a single ‘terrorist’ watch list to eliminate confusion, duplication, and avoid bad communications, but ever since January 6, not only have we expanded exponentially into purely domestic watchlisting, but we have also created a highly secretive and compartmented superstructure that few even understand," a DHS attorney "intimately familiar" with the matter told Klippenstein on condition of anonymity, referring to the deadly January 2021 Capitol insurrection.
According to Klippenstein:
Prior to 9/11, there were nine federal agencies that maintained 12 separate watchlists. Now, officially there are just three: a watch list of 1.1 million international terrorists, a watch list of more than 10,000 domestic terrorists maintained by the FBI, and a new watch list of transnational criminals, built up to more than 85,000 over the past decade...
Among other functions, the new watchlists process tips, situation reports, and collected photographs and video submitted by both the public and from agents in the field; they create a “common operating picture” in places like Minneapolis; they allow task forces to target individuals for surveillance and arrest; and they create the capacity for intelligence people to link individuals together through geographic proximity or what is labeled “call chaining” by processing telephone numbers, emails, and other contact information.
Asked about how the Trump administration might try to legally justify these watchlists, Rachel Levinson-Waldman, the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program director, cited President Donald Trump's National Security Presidential Memo 7 (NSPM-7), which mandates a “national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts."
Levinson-Waldman also noted Attorney General Pam Bondi's December 5 memo directing federal agencies to expand the investigation and prosecution of "domestic terrorism," including groups "aligned" with antifa, an anti-fascist ideology that does not exist as an organization.
One senior intelligence official who confirmed the existence of the watchlists warned Klippenstein: "Lists of this and that—this social media post, that video taken of someone videoing ICE, the mere attendance at a protest—gets pulsed by federal cops on the beat to check for criminality but eventually just becomes a list itself of criminality, with the cops thinking that indeed they are dealing with criminals and terrorists. Watchlists, and the whole watchlisting process, should be as transparent as possible, not the other way around."
"If we don’t explore more why all of these secret lists exist," the official added, there could be "even more of an environment of paranoia on the ground and more tragic killings.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular