- ISIL creates all-female brigade to terrorize women into following Sharia law
- ISTOOK: Obama wants to be impeached
- Obama to Latin leaders: Help with border
- Military bans troops from Baptist church event honoring ‘God’s Rescue Squad’
- ‘Pocket drones’: U.S. Army developing tiny surveillance tools for the next big war
- Belgian cafe posts sign: Dogs allowed, but Jews stay out
- Gen. Dempsey: Pentagon studying Russian readiness plans not viewed ‘for 20 years’
- John McCain: Botched, two-hour execution of murderer is ‘torture’
- House GOP ready to move border bill
- Bomb squad called after live WWII artillery washes on Cape Cod beach
Fiscal cliff forecast: Bad now, worse later
Budget analysts warn all options will be painful
Question of the Day
As Congress prepares to try to negotiate ways to avoid the fiscal cliff, its own scorekeeper has some stark analysis: There will be pain no matter what, but ducking choices now will mean an even worse situation by the end of the decade.
In two reports Thursday, the Congressional Budget Office laid out some of the options facing Washington as lawmakers return next week for a lame-duck session of Congress. But the CBO said that no matter what Congress does, the economy in the short term will struggle.
“Even if all of the fiscal tightening was eliminated, the economy would remain below its potential and the unemployment rate would remain higher than usual for some time,” the CBO said.
However, the nonpartisan agency went on to say that canceling the looming tax increases and spending cuts due in January would deepen deficits and leave the country less able to handle a major crisis in the future.
“If the fiscal tightening was removed, and the policies that are currently in effect were kept in place indefinitely, a continued surge in federal debt during the rest of this decade and beyond would raise the risk of a fiscal crisis … and would eventually reduce the nation’s output and income below what would occur,” the agency analysts said.
The reports were released as both sides gingerly begin to talk about a way forward on budget matters after this week’s elections.
Voters sent Democrats back with an expanded majority in the Senate, sent Republicans back with a slimmer majority in the House, and renewed President Obama’s lease on the White House, though by a narrower margin than in 2008.
Without a clear mandate for either side, both parties were searching for ways to head off the so-called fiscal cliff in as painless a way as possible.
House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, on Wednesday said the GOP won’t accept tax increases, though it will accept changes that eventually would increase revenue through a more efficient tax code.
Democrats, though, said voters embraced higher tax rates, at least on the wealthy. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, said that will have to be part of any package.
All sides appear to agree that taxes rates should be kept lower for most other Americans — something that the CBO said will indeed help the economy in the short term, but deepen deficits and hurt over the longer run.
With Congress and the White House now looking for common ground, the CBO laid out the exact short-term economic benefits of some options: Halting the $110 billion in automatic sequesters due Jan. 2 would raise gross domestic product by three-quarters of a percent next year, while extending all of the George W. Bush-era tax cuts, due to expire Jan. 1, would raise GDP by a little less than 1.5 percent.
The spending increase gets more bang for the buck, the CBO said, because recipients likely would save much of the tax cut rather than invest the windfall.
While the CBO doesn’t take sides in congressional debates, its data bolstered several key Democratic claims.
First, CBO said, it’s not likely that any single option would be enough to solve the budget problems — a conclusion that seemed to back Mr. Obama’s rhetoric calling for a “balanced” approach that he said would couple tax increases with the possibility of spending cuts — though he has been far more specific on the tax increases than the spending cuts.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Stephen Dinan can be reached at email@example.com.
- Lois Lerner emails reveal gaping open-records loophole
- Two-thirds of illegal immigrant children approved for asylum: report
- Top Justice official denies conspiring with IRS on tea party targeting
- Boehner: No bill on border surge
- Taking Obama to court a long shot but lawsuit not folly, Congress is told
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
President wants everyone but himself to pay more
- 'We're coming for you, Barack Obama': Top U.S. official discloses threat from ISIL terrorists
- 'Pocket drones': U.S. Army developing tiny spies for the next big war
- Ted Nugent loses second casino gig for 'racist remarks'
- ISTOOK: Obama wants to be impeached
- EDITORIAL: Detroit's water 'spigot bigots'
- NAPOLITANO: What if our democracy is a fraud?
- Ohio university quiz implies atheists are naturally smarter than Christians
- Obama orders Pentagon advisers to Ukraine
- EDITORIAL: Obama's 'economic patriotism' means higher taxes
- Afghan who killed three U.S. Marines in 2012 to serve over 7-year prison sentence
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq