CBO estimate of Obama's deficit reduction plan

[boedicca]

Huh? They included a rough estimate of its financial impact in the second decade in the original analysis. The law cuts the deficit substantially more in the second decade than it does in the first.

Effects of the Legislation Beyond the First 10 Years

Although CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period, certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested CBO’s analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance systems. Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time. Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates.

Using that same analytic approach, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation bill would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with a total effect that is in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.​

Now did you hear somewhere that the CBO didn't consider the impact of the legislation up to the 20-year-mark or did you just make that up yourself?

And these estimates are all moot now that the "glitch" which makes millions of middle class people eligible for Medicaid has been discovered.

Wonder what the numbers will be when they factor that in. I'm guessing an extra trillion or two.

More than that...it means the death of private insurance and a full public option.

 

[kwc57]

Do.I need to go link you to a few.threads where people like you say the cbo only gets info handed to them so its not correct?
using the cbo to justify your hate and partisan shit is quite hacky. Either you believe them when the info is and.bad.or.you don't believe anything from them period.

You're way off topic here. When questioned about Obama's reduction plan, the CBO said they do not estimate speeches..........because all Obama has done is make speeches and not offered a plan. How can the CBO offer an opinion on........nothing?

Nice to see that somebody can actually comprehend a post and extrapolate the point that is being made.

I do what I can.

 

[BentWingedAngel]

Brian Beutler

On Wednesday, the Congressional Budget Office released its updated long-term budget forecast, which looked surprisingly like the previous version of its long-term budget forecast.

It showed, as one might expect, that if the Bush tax-cuts remain in effect and Medicare and Medicaid spending isn't constrained in some way, the country will topple into a genuine fiscal crisis -- not the fake one the Congress is pretending the country's in right now.

Republicans, of course, seized on that particular projection, and claimed (a bit ridiculously) that it proved the government must adopt their precise policy views: major spending cuts, particularly to entitlement programs.

While all this -- from the findings to the politicization of them -- is perfectly expected, the forecast also presents another opportunity to remind people that the medium-term budget outlook is perfectly fine if Congress adheres to the law as it's currently written. That means no repealing the health care law, for one, but more significantly it means allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, and (unfathomably) allowing Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors to fall to the levels prescribed by the formula Congress wrote almost 15 years ago. In other words, no more "doc fixes."

 

[Nic_Driver]

According to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates, extending all of the Bush tax cuts would reduce revenue by $2.7 trillion through 2020. Allowing the tax cuts to expire only for those making more than $200,000 a year (or couples making over $250,000) would save an estimated $700 billion:

You're all on board with the CBO?


Great news!!!

 

[Wiseacre]

And these estimates are all moot now that the "glitch" which makes millions of middle class people eligible for Medicaid has been discovered.

Wonder what the numbers will be when they factor that in. I'm guessing an extra trillion or two.

More than that...it means the death of private insurance and a full public option.

Which was the goal all along. Single payer by default.