Three reactions to Simpson-Bowles II
The co-chairs of President Obama's fiscal stability commission have another deficit reduction plan. Will it work?
Topics: Jared Bernstein, Simpson-Bowles, Deficit, Fiscal stability, U.S. Economy, News, Politics News
That deficit demolishing duo of distinction —Simpson/Bowles—is at it again, out with the shell of a new planto reduce the deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade.
My first reaction was “really??…another new plan??…we need that!??” My second was “why $2.4 trillion?” We at CBPP have argued that our first order goal should be to stabilize the debt over the decade, and to do so would take about another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction ($1.3 trillion in policy savings and the rest in interest savings). My third reaction was, “Why did the White House elevate these guys and was that a mistake?”
Re reaction #1 (do we need another plan?) these two dudes are deeply ensconced in this debate—and quite passionate about it—and there’s no stopping them from weighing in. Among the minority that’s actually looked closely at what they’ve proposed, you won’t find anyone who agrees with all of their ideas, as they’d be the first to admit. But they certainly have very high standing on the issue of the national debt.
That said, this new plan doesn’t look to be very helpful (reaction #2). The White House is on board with the $1.5 trillion for debt stabilization, which would replace the sequester with as-yet-unspecified balance between new revenues and more spending cuts (the administration’s budget plan will be out in a matter of weeks in their budget—another reason for S/B to hold their fire for now).
This will already be an extremely heavy lift and one that if not done thoughtfully, will inflict more fiscal wounds on an economy still struggling to heal (something S/B warn about, to their credit). S/B’s main rationale for another $900 billion in deficit savings seems to be that they want the debt to GDP ratio to hit 70% in ten years as opposed to the 73% that we target in our report.
As I’ve argued in lots of places, there are good reasons to stabilize at lower levels and even better reasons not to get so wound up about the level of the debt ratio, as much as the change. A credible budget plan should first stop the debt from growing faster than the economy and do so in a way that doesn’t hurt the current recovery or compromise critical investment, retirement security, and investment functions of the government. There’s diverse thinking about how to do this, with EPI on one side, us in the middle, and S/B pushing for more.
Jared Bernstein joined the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in May 2011 as a Senior Fellow. From 2009 to 2011, Bernstein was the Chief Economist and Economic Adviser to Vice President Joe Biden. Follow his work via Twitter at @econjared and @centeronbudget. More Jared Bernstein.





Ken Cuccinelli Once Filed An Amendment To Change Virginia's State Song To The Beatles' "Taxman"
Masters Of The Universe: Lawmakers Obsess Over Threats From Space
Commerce Appointment Opens A New White House Rift

Comments
2 Comments