off the charts

You are here

Corker-McCaskill Spending Cuts Far Exceed “Ridiculous” House Republican Proposal

February 1, 2011

As we noted earlier, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities released a report today explaining why a statutory spending limit like the one Senators Corker and McCaskill have proposed would ultimately lead to draconian cuts in crucial programs like Social Security and Medicare and also could have highly damaging effects in future economic downturns.

House GOP Group Would Decimate Key Services

January 21, 2011

The new proposal of the House Republican Study Committee (RSC) to cut and then freeze non-defense discretionary spending at 2006 levels from 2012 through 2021 would mean cuts of more than 40 percent in education, environmental protection, law enforcement, medical research, food safety, and many other key services.

New Rules Suggest Tax Cuts Trump Deficit Reduction for House Republicans

January 3, 2011

“Are House Republicans serious about dealing with the deficit? You could listen to their rhetoric — or you could read the rules they are poised to adopt at the start of the new Congress, . . . [which] suggest that the new GOP majority is determined to continue the spree of unaffordable tax-cutting,” the Washington Post’s lead editorial today explains. A report we issued just before Christmas takes a close look at the new rules:

Senate Funding Bill Getting a Bum Rap

December 16, 2010

Contrary to some claims, the omnibus appropriations bill the Senate will likely vote on soon is not “bloated” — it provides $27 billion less in discretionary funding for the current fiscal year (2011) than President Obama requested and is consistent with the severe funding cap that Senators Sessions and McCaskill proposed earlier this year.

Bowles-Simpson 2.0: How Does It Compare to the Original?

December 3, 2010

We praised the original proposal that the co-chairs of the President’s fiscal commission issued on November 10 for putting all parts of the budget on the table and outlining an array of hard choices. But we concluded that the plan doesn’t represent a balanced approach to bringing deficits under control, and we listed six improvements that were particularly needed. Now that co-chairs Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson have issued a revised, final proposal, here’s a brief look at the degree to which it addresses those six needed improvements:

Bowles-Simpson Budget Plan a Useful Start — But Changes Badly Needed

November 16, 2010

We issued a major analysis today of the November 10 proposal by the co-chairs of President Obama’s fiscal commission, former Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles and former Republican Senator Alan Simpson.

A Caution on Biennial Budgeting

September 30, 2010

One proposal that reportedly received some support at yesterday’s meeting of the President’s Fiscal Commission was the idea of moving the federal budget from an annual to a biennial cycle. Proponents claim biennial budgeting will lead to more thoughtful budgeting and improved congressional oversight.

New CBO Update Shows No Change in Budget Outlook

August 19, 2010

“[T]he nation’s budget outlook over the coming decade has not changed materially in the five months since [the Congressional Budget Office] released its previous projections,” according to CBO’s update of the federal budget released today. The estimated deficit for the fiscal year that will end on September 30 is $1.342 trillion — just 2 percent ($27 billion) smaller than CBO’s March estimate.

If You Put Tax Cuts on the National Credit Card, You Can’t Ignore the Interest

August 11, 2010

The Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl continues to defend his claim that the Bush tax cuts aren’t a major contributor to current and future deficits. Our analysis shows otherwise.

Charge That Health Reform’s Supporters Are Double-Counting Medicare Savings is Nonsense

August 6, 2010

The National League’s home run leader, Washington Nationals slugger Adam Dunn, hit two homers on Wednesday in the Nats’ 7-2 win over the Arizona Diamondbacks. What would you do if a disgruntled Diamondback suggested that Major League Baseball should not count those homers toward his individual home run total and toward the Nats’ run total in their 7-2 win because, somehow, this amounted to “double counting”? You’d laugh, right?