The Senate Finance Committee has reported out S. 1796, its version of a health care reform bill. This was preceded, and indeed made possible, by an estimate from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) that the bill would increase federal government spending by only $829 billion in 2010-2019. With new taxes and reductions in projected spending in Medicare and Medicaid, CBO said this would actually result in a net saving to the federal budget of $81 billion over this period. The bill’s advocates greeted this estimate with relief, tinged with self-congratulation for having produced a bill that, in the current environment, was considered by them to be fiscally responsible.
Restricting Sugar Imports, Hidden Tax Increases, and Just Plain Waste
The antiquated U.S. sugar program continues to cause trouble for American companies, consumers and taxpayers. While supporters of the program have always tried to claim that it doesn’t cost taxpayers any money, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the highly restrictive import quota already costs U.S. consumers as much as $1.9 billion annually, which is nothing more than a sugar consumer tax.
OMB Plays Three Card Monte With Deficit Numbers
As a rite of August when the nation’s capital moves slowly, official Washington plays an interesting game of re-estimating the budget deficit. It is known as the Mid-Session Budget Review and both the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) take part. While both review the state of the federal budget and outlook for projected deficits over the next 10 years, they issue very different reports.
OMB Plays Three Card Monte With Deficit Numbers
As a rite of August when the nation’s capital moves slowly, official Washington plays an interesting game of re-estimating the budget deficit. It is known as the Mid-Session Budget Review and both the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) take part. While both review the state of the federal budget and outlook for projected deficits over the next 10 years, they issue very different reports.
Public Outrage Grounds Congressional Jets
In 2005, Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) tried to fund the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere,” which would have connected the mainland of Alaska to an island of only 50 people. After the bridge became the “poster child” for pork and taxpayers expressed their disdain, funding for the “Bridge to Nowhere” was eliminated.
California’s $7 Billion Bailout?
When Congress debates California’s requested $7 billion bailout, instead of looking at the benefits it could bring California, they first need to look at the source of the problem and understand the reasons why the state is in such trouble. Citizens and business owners in California are outraged that the state government continues to raise taxes while refusing to eliminate wasteful spending.
Blue Dogs and PAYGO – Living in La La Land
On April 28, 2009, members of the so-called fiscally conservative “Blue Dog” Coalition introduced H.R. 2116, the “Fiscal Honesty and Accountability Act of 2009.” According to their website, the measure “would strengthen Congress’ commitment to fiscal responsibility and accountability by reinstituting statutory pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) rules. The legislation, which would require both the House and Senate to abide by PAYGO rules if enacted into law, has been a cornerstone of the Blue Dogs’ efforts to restore fiscal discipline to the federal government.”
Stimulus not Stimulating
The White House announcement on May 20 of 100 projects in 100 days of the stimulus, a plan that was intended to be “timely, temporary, and targeted,” was greeted with great skepticism, including an ongoing dispute about the amount of money that has been spent and how many jobs have (or have not) been created.
Weatherization Assistance Program – A Perfect Storm of Potential Waste?
President Obama’s $787 billion so-called “stimulus” bill, formally known as the America Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), will have reverberations throughout the economy for years to come. The contained a wide range of new government spending programs as well as dramatic increases in existing programs, some of which had previously been funded with relatively small budgets.
The First Cut Is The Lamest, Not The Deepest
In February, President Obama introduced a $3.69 trillion budget for the 2010 fiscal year, a proposal that would, according the Heritage Foundation, increase spending by $1 trillion over the next ten years, lead to a 12 percent increase in discretionary spending, and leave permanent deficits averaging $600 billion even after the economy recovers. In a peace offering to get some political cover for this explosion of spending, President Obama called for his cabinet to make $100 million worth of spending cuts.