Could the CBO Be Wrong?

Lately, our congressman, Rep. Tom Reed has taken to citing figures from reports by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to bolster his Tea Party positions. He’s referred to a CBO projection that interest on the national debt will amount $880 billion in 2024, or 18 per cent of government revenues. He has erroneously claimed that the CBO had predicted 2.5 million job losses because of the Affordable Care Act, although the agency did estimate that the Act would reduce the size of the workforce by such a number.

The carefully researched reports of the Congressional Budget Office have to be given considerable weight, but Floyd Norris, chief financial correspondent of the New York Times, points out that the CBO has been wrong in the past. Most notably, it determined in 2001 that the unusually high levels of tax receipts seen in the 1990s would continue, allowing the federal debt to be paid off by 2006. The agency failed to notice that the high tax receipts resulted from tech entrepreneurs cashing in their stock options during the technology stock bubble and paying income taxes on their profits. When the bubble burst, these tax receipts disappeared. Unfortunately, the CBO error had already given President George W. Bush the ammunition he needed to push through historic tax cuts that continue to hobble our government today.

So how about that cripplingly high interest payment in 2024 cited by Rep. Reed? Norris notes that the CBO report including this estimate makes two assumptions: (1) that the economy will remain sluggish, limiting tax revenues, and (2) that interest rates will return to historic levels, forcing the government to pay more for the money it borrows. Can both of these assumptions be true at the same time? If the economy remains sluggish, there is no reason to expect interest rates to rise, particularly with Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellin promising to keep interest rates near zero as long as unemployment remains above 6.5 per cent. If the economy begins to grow more robustly, interest rates will rise, but so will the amount the government takes in as tax revenues. In that case, the size of the interest payment in relation to income will be much less significant.

How about the projected reduction in the workforce due to the Affordable Care Act? Is it reasonable to believe the workforce will shrink because Obamacare will free some workers to leave jobs that provided them with health insurance? It would seem just as reasonable to believe that new workers will be hired to fill the vacated slots, or that existing workers will be promoted into these slots, opening jobs to new hires at lower levels. Moreover, some of those who leave their jobs will be starting new businesses or free-lancing from home, giving a boost to the economy and potentially creating new jobs.

The same reasoning could be applied to the latest CBO projection being cited by the right — that raising the minimum wage to $10.10 could result in the loss of 500,000 jobs. Critics who focus on this figure don’t mention that the same report predicted that raising the minimum wage would mean higher pay for 16.5 million workers and lift 900,000 out of poverty. Other economists, outside the CBO, argue that an economic boost on this scale could create jobs rather than costing jobs. After all, workers who have been stuck in low-wage jobs would suddenly have money to spend on food, clothing, cars, and apartments, which could only be good for the economy. Higher wages could also mean lower worker turnover and greater employee satisfaction, which might even boost corporate profits.

Let’s give the CBO its due for doing serious work in a highly-charged political environment, but let’s also recognize that its findings need to be subjected to careful analysis and honest debate. And most important — let’s not be stampeded into damaging workers or undermining the hard-won gains of Obamacare by Tea Party activists who cherry pick figures from CBO reports for partisan purposes.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Could the CBO Be Wrong?

  1. BOB MCGILL says:

    There are a lot, what ifs’, could bes’, and such. Why don’t you stop speculating, and just wait and see what happens, but oh no you can’t bash Tom if you do that. Hey why don’t you get a part time job or something I here thay are raising minimum wage. 🙂


  2. BOB MCGILL says:…/obamas-national-d…‎CachedThe Washington TimesLoading…Oct 9, 2013 – Obama’s national debt rate on track to double … In the same time frame under President George W. Bush, total federal debt rose 38 percent.


  3. BOB MCGILL says:…/national-debt-has-increased-mo…‎CachedCBS NewsLoading…by Mark Knoller – in 22 Google+ circles
    Mar 19, 2012 – The National Debt has risen $4.939T since Obama took office; It went up $4.899T during the eight years of the Bush presidency.


  4. Deb Meeker says:

    Thanks Ray Copson, for bringing another point of view. Tom Reed’s ever present manipulation of “facts” to suit his own agenda, can usually be more easily seen than in this case. I’m hoping Fed Chair Yellen will see nuance more clearly than her predecessors.


  5. BOB McGILL says:



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.