Discretionary Funding Under the New Congressional Budget Plan
A Big Increase or a Modest Offset To Recent Cuts?
 All figures in this analysis exclude “emergency” funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and other purposes; consequently, defense increases discussed in this analysis are for purposes other than prosecuting those wars.
 In portraying the funding levels in the congressional budget resolution and those in earlier years in real per-person terms (this paragraph) and as a percentage of GDP (next paragraph), we have adjusted all figures to account for timing and scorekeeping anomalies that would otherwise distort year-to-year comparisons. For a discussion of these adjustments, see the Appendix of “The Omnibus Appropriations Act: Are Appropriations for Domestic Programs out of Control?” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, February 1, 2004. (The biggest adjustment is to include discretionary amounts for highway and mass transit programs, which are not officially counted as discretionary “budget authority” but should be.) The congressional budget plan does not make the detailed program assumptions we would need to adjust the assumed 2008 funding levels in the same way that we have adjusted prior funding levels. For comparability we assume that the amount of these adjustments — such as the level of funding fro highway programs — will grow from 2007 to 2008 at the same rate as officially scored budget authority, for which we have both historical data and the figures in the congressional budget plan.
Had we made no adjustments to official funding figures, the essential conclusions of these two paragraphs would still be the same: the non-defense funding level for 2008 that is reflected in the congressional budget plan is lower in real per-person terms than the funding actually provided in 2002-2005, and is lower as a percentage of GDP than the funding actually provided in 2001-2006.