Coming Attractions: The King Kong-Mothra-Godzilla Of All Budget Debates

Pete does a good job with an overview of the numbers from the mid-session budget reviews released this morning by OMB and CBO, so there’s no need to repeat them.

It’s important to note, though, that there are some indications that even the lower-than-previously projected deficit included by OMB in its report may be lowered further when the final numbers for fiscal 2009 are released in late October.  As Donald Marron posts on his blog, the actual deficit may well end up closer to $1.4 trillion than $1.6 trillion.

No matter what the actual deficit is, it is clear from reading the two reports that very little can be blamed on either the Obama administration or the current Congress.  Bruce Bartlett sent the following e-mail earlier today (which is quoted with his permission) with an excellent analysis:

CBO projected a deficit of $1,186 billion in January before Obama took office.  It now projects a deficit of $1,587 billion, an increase of $401 billion.  If one goes through the March update (pp. 6-7) and the August update (pp. 52-53) and adds up all the changes to the January estimate, you find that the deficit increase since January consists of $46 billion in lower than expected revenues due to the economy (11.5%), $129 billion in higher spending due to technical re-estimates (32.2%), and $226 billion due to legislative changes to both spending and revenues (56.3%).

This suggests that we would have had a deficit of at least $1,361 billion this year even if McCain had won (January deficit plus lower revenues and technical changes and no legislative changes)—assuming no stimulus and assuming that the economy would have done as well as it has done without it.  That’s only 14% less than the deficit currently projected.  And keep in mind that some of the legislative changes are due to higher defense spending and other non-stimulus related programs.

But McCain undoubtedly would have supported some sort of fiscal stimulus.  It might have been more tax- than spending-oriented, but would have increased the deficit nevertheless.  If we assume that McCain’s stimulus would have been half the size of Obama’s that leaves us with an estimated deficit of $1,474 billion under McCain—only 7% less than the deficit now estimated.

Frankly, I doubt that a McCain stimulus would have been half the size.  My guess is that it would have been at least as large as the one that ultimately was enacted.  Nevertheless, Bruce’s basic point is sound: the deficit that Obama has to deal with was not of his making.

But regardless of who is to blame for the deficit, there’s no doubt that it’s Obama’s responsibility to deal with it.

That leads to the most important result of the mid-session reviews: it’s now far more likely that the fiscal 2011 budget debate, which will start next year when the president submits his budget to Congress in late January or early February, will be among the most difficult, vicious, and painful of any that has taken place in the past 30 years.

Here’s why:

1.  It will be an election year

2.  Partisanship in Washington is much stronger now than it was during any of the previously budget figthts.  This includes the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings debate in 1985 and the Clinton-Gingrich debate in the mid-1990s that resulted in government shutdowns.

3.  The deficit is much larger now both nominally and as a percentage of GDP than it has been since World War II.

4.  The national debt is much larger now than it was when GRH was debated and Clinton and Gingrich sparred.  The much greater interest being paid on the national debt will put far more pressure on all other spending in the budget and tax increases.

5.  More than 50 Blue Dog Democrats will push the White House to deal with the deficit.

6.  The deficit will be a big issue for the first-term Democrats who were elected from what had been Republican districts.  They will be facing what could be the toughest reelection battles of their careers and will need to show their constituents that, because of them and their party, some progress has been made on the deficit.

7.  The bond market will push for deficit reductions.

8.  Foreign creditors, especially the Chinese, will push for deficit reductions.

9.  Some on Wall Street and elsewhere will express extreme concern about inflation and interest rates stopping the recovery in its tracks unless deficit reductions are put in place.

10.  Obama, who promised deficit reductions once the economy started to recover, will be hard-pressed not to live up to that promise.  He will be pressured to do so by the Blue Dogs, many of which supported the White House this year because they were told that the deficit would become a front burner priority next year.

Disclaimer: This page contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, we may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!

About Stan Collender 126 Articles

Affiliation: Qorvis Communications

Stan Collender is a former New Yorker who, after getting a degree from the University of California, Berkeley, moved to Washington to get it out of his system. That was more than 30 years ago.

During most of his career, Collender has worked on the federal budget and congressional budget process, including stints on the staff of the House and Senate Budget Committees; founding the Federal Budget Report, a newsletter that was published for almost two decades; and for the past 11 years writing a weekly column for and now

He is currently a managing director for Qorvis Communications, where he spends most of his time working with and for financial services clients.

Visit: Capital Gains and Games

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


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