It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The new, “dynamic” CBO will be systematically biased to make conservative proposals appear misleadingly cheap and liberal proposals misleadingly costly to the public fisc. This would be true even if the Republicans were soliciting a fair range of forecasting perspectives. By its design, the dynamic scoring rule allows the party in power to game its effects. It applies “dynamic scoring” only to legislation affecting 0.25 percent of Gross Domestic Product. As Chye-Ching Huang and Paul Van de Water point out, congressional leaders can manipulate this requirement easily: They can break up large pieces of legislation into smaller bills to avoid dynamic scoring, or combine smaller pieces into a major bill, if needed to make their agenda appear more affordable. Dynamic scoring is subject to abuse by its very design. Source
The change on “dynamic scoring” — ardently sought since the 1990s by Republicans — could ease passage of major tax cuts by showing that their impact on economic growth would substantially reduce their cost to the Treasury. The move is widely seen as a way for Republican leaders to set ground rules for an ambitious overhaul of the entire United States tax code.
Speaker John A. Boehner and Representative Nancy Pelosi not long after he beat back an embarrassing challenge to retain his post on Tuesday.Boehner Fends Off Dissent as G.O.P. Takes the ReinsJAN. 6, 2015
“We’re saying, ‘If you think a piece of legislation is going to have a big effect on the economy, then include that effect in the official cost estimate,’ ” said Representative Tom Price, Republican of Georgia, the new chairman of the House Budget Committee. “So if you think a bill is going to help or hurt the economy, then tell us how much.” Source
The House will vote today on a resolution requiring the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) to adopt a practice known as “dynamic scoring,” which would change how the Congress calculates the expected cost of a piece of legislation. Current rules require calculating a policy’s direct cost to the government, which includes looking at how affected individuals and firms would react to the policy. But dynamic scoring goes further by requiring that budget estimates also take into account how policies could affect the total size of the economy. While this may seem like another example of Washington “inside baseball” with little impact on the American public, using dynamic scoring for official cost estimates would risk injecting bias into a broadly accepted, non-partisan scoring process that has existed for decades. As a result, it could allow Congress to adopt legislation that increases Federal deficits, while masking its costs.
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: theNLBS
It figures. The 'first' Republican move is attacked by the left. (Perhaps valid).
originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: SlapMonkey
well I don't believe you on the cost of war bit
I kind of think that we still don't really know how much the bush admin rung up on that
kind of think that some of the things that happened prior to the housing collapse were done to help secretly fund it ( check out video from "V the economist" and I beiieve it's jim willie) and if I am right then we still don't know the true cost is
as far as them both playing a nasty game I know they are but my comment regarding the entitlements was made bacause one of the republicans kind of said the deficit wasn't important or was cutting the budget reallly
but then went on about how the entitlements needed to be reigned in
and social security is the biggest chunk among those programs and that would have had plenty of money in it if hadn't been raiding it all along to pay for the tax cuts and perks for big business, wars, silly spending like bridges to nowhere or airports that weren't needed!
because one side believes money should be used for this set of items and the other set over there should be the only ones cut and the other side believes just the opposite nothing seems to be done except for a ton of useless spending.
and well your solution of cutting everything by a small amount would at least do something!!
but then I bet that they would still be trying to exempt this or that from the cuts.