iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

CBO: Obama Understates Future Budget Deficits By $2.3 Trillion

Obama Deficit Cbo

03/18/11 09:22 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — A new assessment of President Barack Obama's budget released Friday says the White House underestimates future budget deficits by more than $2 trillion over the upcoming decade.

The estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says that if Obama's February budget submission is enacted into law it would produce deficits totaling $9.5 trillion over 10 years – an average of almost $1 trillion a year.

Obama's budget saw deficits totaling $7.2 trillion over the same period.

The difference is chiefly because CBO has a less optimistic estimate of how much the government will collect in tax revenues, partly because the administration has rosier economic projections.

But the agency also rejects the administration's claims of more than $300 billion of that savings – to pay for preventing a cut in Medicare payments to doctors – because it doesn't specify where it would come from. Likewise, CBO fails to credit the White House with an additional $328 billion that would come from unspecified "bipartisan financing" to pay for transportation infrastructure projects such as high speed rail lines and road and bridge construction.

Friday's report actually predicts the deficit for the current budget year, which ends Sept. 30, won't be as bad as the $1.6 trillion predicted by the administration and will instead register $200 billion less. But 10 years from now, CBO sees a $1.2 trillion deficit that's almost $400 billion above White House projections.

The estimated cost of the new health care law increased by about $90 billion, to $1.13 trillion, from 2012-2021. But the budget office didn't issue a new estimate of the taxes and savings in the legislation that pay for Obama's expansion of health insurance.

CBO had earlier projected the total of those offsets at $1.25 trillion. So the margin by which the new health care law reduces federal deficits appeared to be shrinking.

The White House's goal is to reach a point where the budget is balanced except for interest payments on the $14 trillion national debt. Such "primary balance" occurs when the deficit is about 3 percent of the size of the economy, and economists say deficits of that magnitude are generally sustainable.

But CBO predicts that the deficit never gets below 4 percent of gross domestic product. That means that by the time 2021 arrives, the portion of the debt held by investors and foreign countries will reach a dangerously high 87 percent. And, as a result, interest costs for the government would explode from $214 billion this year to almost $1 trillion by decade's end.

"The President's budget never reaches 'primary balance,' meaning that it fails to clear even the low bar the administration set for itself in justifying its claims of sustainability," said House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis.

White House budget director Jacob Lew said in a blog post that "CBO confirms what we already know: current deficits are unacceptably high and if we stay on our current course and do nothing, the fiscal situation will hurt our recovery and hamstring future growth."

The estimate adds urgency to calls on Capitol Hill for action on runaway deficits that many economists fear – if left unchecked – could trigger a European-style debt crisis that could force draconian measures such as cutting federal benefits for seniors or forcing broad-based tax increases.

Just on Friday, 64 senators – 32 in each party – signed a letter to Obama calling on him to take the lead in coming up with a comprehensive deficit reduction plan along the lines of a plan issued last year by his own deficit commission. That plan called for a comprehensive overhaul of the tax code that would trade dozens of expensive tax breaks for lower individual and corporate rates, curb Social Security benefits and clamp down on spending across the budget.

"While we may not agree with every aspect of the commission's recommendations, we believe that its work represents an important foundation to achieve meaningful progress on our debt," the senators wrote. They said that "with a strong signal of support from you, we believe that we can achieve consensus on these important fiscal issues."

Conversely, the report is a sobering blow to House Republicans charged with developing a budget blueprint that could satisfy its core supporters in the tea party. Republican lawmakers had already acknowledged that they won't be able to generate a budget that comes to balance by the end of the decade.

Friday's news makes that task even more difficult.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — A new assessment of President Barack Obama's budget released Friday says the White House underestimates future budget deficits by more than $2 trillion over the upcoming decade. Th...
WASHINGTON — A new assessment of President Barack Obama's budget released Friday says the White House underestimates future budget deficits by more than $2 trillion over the upcoming decade. Th...
Filed by Elyse Siegel  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,687
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (37 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
OntheBorder
Part of the 53% that carries the Liberal weight
12:24 PM on 03/21/2011
What is more of concern is that both parties know the current level of debt and budget deficit are unsustainable.

BUT, neither party has come forward with a plan to balance the budget and substantially reduce the debt.

All these clowns play hide the weenie with our TAXES. Neither party is acting in AMERICA's best interest.
03:13 PM on 03/21/2011
true, but only as to ONE party
08:43 AM on 03/21/2011
Forget about the deficit. The important number is $1,000,000,000 for 2012 Obama campaign. Please give to support the Big O. We need 4 more years of this?
08:28 AM on 03/21/2011
The only thing not above this guy's pay grade is March Madness picks.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
11:21 PM on 03/21/2011
Do you believe that Obama personally makes economic forecasts?
 
Don't you think if two unrelated groups of economists came up with different ten-year forecasts for economic growth, and they differed by only 20% over the entire ten year period, that those two groups of economists are actually pretty close in their long-term predictions?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Judson Wallace
03:59 AM on 03/21/2011
You want a solution? Get Americans to begin growing their own fuel. We export billions of money overseas a year that could stay within the economy.

Biofuel can be done cleanly and sustainably. One of the worst states right now (financially): Florida, is prime location for growing bio mass crops like bamboo. As long as ash or salts are returned to the soil the system is sustainable indefinitely.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Judson Wallace
04:05 AM on 03/21/2011
ROFL. Billions of Dollars, or billions of monies... billions of money makes no sense ;p
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:36 PM on 03/21/2011
How about the acres and acres of sugar cane they are already growing there and in several other southern states. Forget corn though.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
10:48 PM on 03/21/2011
Bio-fuels may have some limited applications in the future, like jet aircraft, but they are not an environmentally suitable replacement for gasoline because biofuels emit greenhouse gasses. 
 
Brazil, the most successful producer and user of biofuels, with the most ideal climate conditions to produce biomass crops in much larger quantities than the US ever could, cannot produce enough biofuel to replace gasoline.  Biofuels account for 1/3 of Brazil's renewable energy sources, and all of its renewable energy sources combined provide slightly less than half the nation's energy needs.  The US will never come close to that in biofuels.
 
And you're right about corn.  Corn as an energy source = FAIL.
03:08 AM on 03/21/2011
Obama would love if he could fudge these numbers, he can't help his lying way. Number one reason I have zero respect for this guy, compulsive liar, that's true for all libs ;).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
netman714
I used to be disgusted, now I'm just amused
11:21 AM on 03/21/2011
Must feel good to fire off that zinger? Had you bothered to READ, you might have noticed that the CBO is not adding in any of the savings from the Affordable Health Care Act. "But the budget office didn't issue a new estimate of the taxes and savings in the legislation that pay for Obama's expansion of health insurance."
Almost as important is that the party of NO has no idea what to do to solve the ever increasing cost of health care save to privatize it, allow insurance companies to sell across state lines and tort reform - none of which will make a dent in the cost of healthcare.
If you can't lead, move to the back of the bus - there's important work to do and it would be a lot easier of you got out of the way.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:37 PM on 03/21/2011
Obama care equals savings , Keep drinking that kool aide.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:10 AM on 03/21/2011
Math has nothing to do with it.  The differences between Obama and CBO are estimates based on differing forecasts of GDP growth over the next decade.  So, since we can’t possibly evaluate those different forecasts till after the fact, lets all get back together right here ten years from now and comment on what actually happened.
03:15 PM on 03/21/2011
of course those forecasts can be evaluated. you look at the assumptions. the CBO has and declared that obama's assumptions are ludicrously unreasonable.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
10:27 PM on 03/21/2011
Based upon what?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
11:29 PM on 03/21/2011
If Obama's assumptions are so ludicrous, why are the 10 year estimates by the White House projections of revenues from economic growth only about 20% better than the CBO over the entire 10 years, with the largest differences coming toward the end of that ten-year period?  Can anyone forecast ten years into the future with a margin of error of only 20%?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:39 PM on 03/21/2011
So who do we believe the numbers experts or politicians?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
11:14 PM on 03/21/2011
Good question.  By "numbers experts" I assume you mean the economists.  I wouldn't be that generous to economists; they tend to deal in broad concepts and economic models, but their estimates as well as economic assumptions will be greatly influenced by which school of economic thought they subscribe to, and there are several schools, and none of them can prove the others are wrong.  Economic theory has been an ongoing debate for centuries.
 
That said, no elected politicians were involved in either the CBO estimates of future economic growth, nor the white house estimates of the same, EXCEPT: 
 
The top White House economists are picked by Obama and Biden, and these economists hire other economists on staff; and
 
The CBO economists are appointed by congressional leadership, like Cantor, Boehner, Reid, Pelosi.
 
So they are actually all picked indirectly by elected politicians.  More importantly, economic theories are inherently political.  Neo-classical economists were calling for spending cuts to reduce the deficit at the beginning of the recession, while Keynesian economists were calling for more deficit spending to stimulate the economy.
 
Bottom line, the differences between the CBO and the White House over the entire ten-year period amount to 20%, and if anyone thinks economists are capable of forecasting economic events going out ten years with less than a 20% margin of error, they are wrong.  The weather can effect the economy, and we can't predict that out ten years.  Geo-political events affect the economy (bought gasoline lately?) and we can't predict those out ten years either.
 
This article is really nothing but another in a long series of thinly veiled anti-Obama hit-pieces.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mark Godbey
11:36 PM on 03/20/2011
"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money." - Alexis de Tocqueville

Obama and the DemoRats will destroy this country by redistribution of wealth. He is such a socialist and an embarrassment to America. Obama should be impeached as a traitor. Now he is a war criminal for attacking Libya. Even the Arab states are condemning them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
netman714
I used to be disgusted, now I'm just amused
11:23 AM on 03/21/2011
What part of Obama's policies are socialist? Being able to use a word does not automagically make it correct.
Monday morning and the simple-minded are out in force today.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
OntheBorder
Part of the 53% that carries the Liberal weight
12:17 PM on 03/21/2011
Obama is a self proclaimed PROGRESSIVE and lets be honest here: They use the term progressive because they cannot sell SOCIALIST.

Look it up, Socialist rebranded themselves PROGRESSIVES.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:39 PM on 03/21/2011
What about the war criminal statement?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:12 PM on 03/20/2011
He sees it as play money, so he doesn't really care. The sooner he can collapse the system, the sooner he and his ilk can remold it to their unrealistic utopia
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
demsrsilly
Proud supporter of workplace freedom.
11:06 PM on 03/20/2011
Community organizers are not very good with math apparently.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MLukhman
L=Loving I=Intelligent=Beautiful R=Romantic A=Attr
09:37 PM on 03/20/2011
> HUFFPOST SUPER USER mauibob 4 hours ago (5:40 PM)

> he is right on track to their goal of destroying capitalism­.

You will note that this article from 2006, so nothing to do with Obama, but it does indicate that the US capitalism was being destroyed from within. I realise you won't stop blaming the Obama for the ills of the US but carry on missing the target. Texas, the model for the US, NOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2006/sep/10/globaleconomy.globalisation

Some of his solutions are simple, and, in a European context at least, uncontroversial. The winners from globalisation, those at the top of the heap doing highly skilled jobs, should compensate the losers - and that means redistribution: 'You need to improve your social safety nets, invest more in education so that there are fewer unskilled people, and have more progressive taxation.'

One reason there is so much 'angst' about globalisation in America, he says, is that Washington's policies, offering tax breaks to those at the top of the income scale and freezing the minimum wage, have made things worse. 'The way we have been responding clearly isn't working for most Americans. The policy response in the US is reinforcing the problems, rather than alleviating them.'
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
patches12
09:09 PM on 03/20/2011
What a feckless leader... I mean come on.... this guy has zero integrity.... it's come to the point that you know he is being disengenuous when he prefaces his statement by saying

"Let me clear"

He ignored the recommendation of his own, hand picked Budget Commission and then has the audacity to give us a budget that will continue to grow the debt
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
12:20 AM on 03/21/2011
The Budget Commission was unable to agree on any recommendations.
 
By the way, the GOP budget will also continue to grow the debt.  The deficit cannot be cured instantly without causing economic catastrophe.
08:25 PM on 03/20/2011
All the more reason to RAISE TAXES.
09:57 PM on 03/20/2011
All the more reason to raise taxes on the wealthy who don't deserve their wealth!!
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
demsrsilly
Proud supporter of workplace freedom.
11:04 PM on 03/20/2011
Ah yes, the liberal answer to everything. Raise taxes? Do you seriously think that Congress would use ANY additional revenue to pay down debt? No. what will happen is that more will be spent with the additional revenue.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kenhamlett
07:11 PM on 03/20/2011
I am a Democrat who yelled pretty often and pretty loudly when George W. Bush played tricks with the numbers -- like not counting the war in the budget. This is more of the same sadly. Our Democratic President acts more like a Republican every day, and it is not just with respect to the deficit and its reduction. There are more similarities now -- wars and their escalations, Gitmo, tax cuts for rich people, Wall Streeters running the economy, the oil industry managing our policies for their purposes, secrecy in decision-making, etc. -- than disparities, and that is the saddest result of all.
07:57 PM on 03/20/2011
more of the same ??? Really try 10xs WORSE
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
12:35 AM on 03/21/2011
You do understand the headline is erroneous don't you?  Obama did not "understate" anything. Obama's long term estimate differs from the CBOs estimate, and this article explains why.  This is not an issue of fact; it is an issue of estimating the future of the economy
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kenhamlett
04:59 AM on 03/21/2011
I understood the story fine. But, whether the games are played with estimates or actuals, they are still games with the budget, and in a time of budget crisis, we deserve better. I recall the famous Bush estimates on the cost of the drug program for seniors. The estimate was that it would cost $600 billion. The proposal was going nowhere in Congress, so the White House revised its estimate, and the cost suddenly was estimated to be $400 billion. The law was passed, and then, of course, the first estimate turned out to be accurate. This is the same sort of game, and I thought that we Democrats would handle it differently. Turns out this administration acts just the same. The guy who was going to be "different" and ensure that things "changed" has changed very little at all.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kenhamlett
08:21 PM on 03/22/2011
It was well-documented on the HuffPost that the President and his team met privately (no minutes ever released) with the health care industry, and he announced shortly thereafter that the public option was not something that needed to be a part of the bill. The House went onto pass the public option, but when the Senate passed the bill by a simple majority, they did not reinsert the public option, nor did the WH ask them to do so.

The continued operation of Gitmo is now WH policy. They have no further plans to seek its closure. That announcement was made last month.

The Afghan war costs hundreds of millions of dollars a year, and it is going nowhere. They have not told us what our mission is, what constitutes victory, and what our exit strategy is. The VP said "we will be out in 2014 'whatever happens.'" That is some exit strategy. Of course, the WH amended his statement the following day to say that we may remain there longer -- accomplishing nothing. Meanwhile, we are cutting programs for the poor, the elderly, students, etc. -- with cuts to entitlement being "pushed down the road." The President said he would never commit troops without having all three of the things I mentioned, but he does not have them in Afghanistan, and now we do not have them with respect to Libya.

The President has kept some promises, but the big things, he has not kept.
06:58 PM on 03/20/2011
obama at fail# 3257812
06:08 PM on 03/20/2011
I guess Obama just didn't want to admit that his agenda cannot be afforded and he was hoping no one would call him on it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ken Freedom
Post-Modern Adventurer
07:14 PM on 03/20/2011
Right. Obama's agenda of not allowing America to collapse into a third world country.
07:58 PM on 03/20/2011
he has already insured that Haiti has a smaller debt rate than the US, and we are now relished to 3rd world status