congressional budget office

congressional budget office: Page 1

Discussed in (click each link for the full post):

CBO: foreign-born percentage highest in 90 years; 25% non-citizens in poverty; 38% foreign born from Latin America; fewer women work than native-born - 06/15/11

The Congressional Budget Office has released "A Description of the Immigrant Population" (PDF link, cached), showing, among many other things, that the percentage of foreign-born people living in the U.S. is now at its highest since 1920; see the chart attached below.

CBO estimate: anti-American DREAM Act would reduce deficit $140 million a year (i.e., by 0.001%) - 12/02/10

The current U.S. deficit is $13,840,173,213,129 [1]. Per a new Congressional Budget Office estimate, the anti-American DREAM Act would reduce that by around $140,000,000 per year over the next ten years. Over that ten years, per the CBO, the DREAM Act would reduce the deficit by 0.01% from its current value, a miniscule amount.

Immigration Policy Center absurd study claims immigration "reform" would help economy - 04/14/09

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) - part of the American Immigration Lawyers Association-linked American Immigration Law Foundation - has released a new, canard-rich study called "What Immigration Reform Could Mean for the U.S. Economy" (immigrationpolicy.org/index.php?content=fc011309):

CBO evaluates healthcare plans; uninsured could reach 54 million by 2019; watch for liars - 02/25/09

Earlier today, Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Elmendorf testified to the Senate Finance Committee about various healthcare proposals, and his remarks are here ("Options for Expanding Health Insurance Coverage and Controlling Costs").

CBO: SAVE Act would have cost $40 billion over 10 years, incl. $30 billion for e-Verify (Tim Sparapani/ACLU lies) - 02/15/09

On April 4, 2008, the Congressional Budget Office - responding to a request from Rep. John Conyers - estimated the cost of H.R. 4088, the Secure America Through

Stimulus cost: $3.27 trillion over 10 years if Democratic programs allowed to continue - 02/12/09

Rep. Paul Ryan asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate how much the stimulus plan would cost if increased funding for the twenty most Democratic Party-friendly provisions in the bill are made permanent.

CBO: predicts "slow recovery in 2010", non-disastrous recession *without a stimulus* - 02/09/09

On January 8, 2009, Robert Sunshine, Acting Director of the Congressional Budget Office, offered "The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2009 to 2019" (PDF link, via this) in testimony before Congress. While the situation described sounds bleak, it's far from disastrous. In fact, they suggest that - without having to enact a stimulus - we'd have a "slow recovery in 2010".

So, while we'd go through some pain for a year or two, we'd come out of OK and without having to spend around a trillion dollars. Why not just grit our teeth for the next couple of years, perhaps taking a few relatively minor actions in order to help cushion the downtime?

Not only that, but - still not taking the stimulus plan into account - they say:

CBO anticipates that the current recession, which started in December 2007, will last until the second half of 2009, making it the longest recession since World War II. (The longest such recessions otherwise, the 1973–1974 and 1981–1982 recessions, both lasted 16 months. If the current recession were to continue beyond midyear, it would last at least 19 months.) It could also be the deepest recession during the postwar period: By CBO’s estimates, economic output over the next two years will average 6.8 percent below its potential - that is, the level of output that would be produced if the economy’s resources were fully employed (see Figure 1). This ecession, however, may not result in the highest unemployment rate. That rate, in CBO’s forecast, rises to 9.2 percent by early 2010 (up from a low of 4.4 percent at the end of 2006) but is still below the 10.8 percent rate seen near the end of the 1981–1982 recession.

Note that they are taking the TARP (mortgage mess) and fannie mae freddie mac bailouts into account, just not the stimulus bill.

CBO: stimulus bill will *reduce* GDP over the next decade, do more harm than good - 02/05/09

From Stephen Dinan of the Washington Times comes this:
President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing...

Interest cost on stimulus bill: $347 billion over 10 years - 01/27/09

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate just the debt service on the stimulus plan (H.R. 1), i.e., how much it would cost in interest. You can download the PDF with the reply at reason.com/blog/show/131301.html; the important part of it is below as well as Boehner calling it a "trillion dollar spending bill":

Truth Fights Back, just not too well (John Kerry on anti-Obama smears) - 08/14/08

John Kerry's "Campaign for Our Country" has started a new website called Truth Fights Back (truthfightsback.com), and it's pretty bad. For instance, consider the post "Barack Obama is not aligned with Weather Underground", which combines 3rd-grade-level writing with 3rd-grade-level thinking. This is the "smear" (truthfightsback.com/site/smear/200):

Republicans have repeatedly pushed a bogus story about William Ayers, a member of the 60s-era Weather Underground. They make all sorts of bogus claims about his association with Barack Obama and repeatedly try to make the connection between the two stronger.

And, this is the supposed counterattack:

Barack Obama has very little connection to William Ayers. Barack Obama served on the board of a non-profit in Chicago. This non-profit also asked Ayers, now a professor at the University of Chicago, to serve on the board. Obama had nothing to do with his inclusion on the board. Very early in his career, Barack Obama attended one event at Ayer's house, organized for Obama. This was over a decade ago.

Needless to say, there's more to it: link, americanthinker.com/blog/2008/04/finally_the_media_discovers_ob.html

They also discuss the recent Jerome Corsi book (truthfightsback.com/site/smear/236), linking to Media Matter's supposed debunking article (mediamatters.org/items/200808040005). While some of the points MMFA makes are worrisome, most are indeed rather trivial.

Their entry on Obama's Global Poverty Act combines some debunking with a lot of disingenuousness (truthfightsback.com/site/smear/230). The RNC sent out a fundraising letter which is apparently excerpted at crooksandliars.com/2008/08/07/the-lunatics-are-running-the-rncs-asylum:

A bill he has sponsored in the U.S. Senate, the so-called Global Poverty Act
(S. 2433), would raise the amount of American tax dollars allocated to United Nations’ redistribution efforts to $845 billion.

FTS correctly points out that that's not accurate: the bill would only spend $1 million. But, they're disingenuous in pretending that that's all it would do:

Obama does sponsor the Global Poverty Act (S. 2433), an attempt to focus on one of the largest contributors to global instability. However, it simply asks for a refocusing of resources toward this goal, not new spending, essentially mandating more efficiency and focus in meeting this huge problem. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that "implementing S. 2433 would cost less than $1 million per year." It would, therefore, take 8,450 years for the Global Poverty Act to spend the money the RNC claims it would spend.

The DNC (draft) position is to support those MDGs, and Obama wants to meet those goals as well. That is going to require an outlay of billions of dollars, even if only $1 million is spent on the study and the like initially.

FTS also has a rather interesting commenting policy, straight outta Moscow:

TruthFightsBack.com has a strict commenting policy. This is a site for debunking false attacks and misleading smears against Democrats. If you are not interested in that goal, please feel free to comment elsewhere. And due to the emotional nature of the subject matter, we have a few rules that go farther than we would on a normal blog to try to keep the vitriol lower than otherwise possible. We have a goal of finding and spreading the truth, not in attacking others. To further that goal, these behaviors will not be tolerated in comments:
* furthering and amplifying the smears against Democrats
* attacking other posters
* profanity directed at any other poster
* smears against Republicans
* off-topic remarks for their own sake

Independent Task Force on Immigration - 01/15/07

A group convened by the Migration Policy Institute in partnership with Manhattan Institute and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars which published "Immigration and America's Future:A New Chapter" ( link) in [[September, 2006]]. Supports a "new, secure Social Security card" (possibly a national ID card) and "path to legal status for unauthorized immigrants" (a massive amnesty for illegal aliens).

As of creation time, this is the list of those involved: