SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : A US National Health Care System?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: i-node who wrote (10378)10/19/2009 1:26:20 PM
From: TimF1 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) of 42652
 
I've always thought the CBO was pretty fair in their scoring of bills, but it seems they, too, have resorted to misleading tactics with this legislation.

I wouldn't put it that way. Its not really the CBO's fault. They have a certain framework about how they analyze the budget impact of bills. The writers of the bill knew the framework and structured the bill to do very well under that framework. The 10 year period is the CBO's ordinary default. The "little cost for 3+ years, with taxes starting sooner than spending is the plan of the drafters of the bill, to play games with the CBO's process to get good results. The CBO also has to count cuts that are unlikely to be made or maintained, as real cuts that will be made and then kept. The bill is full of items that when pushed in to the CBO's mandatory template look good in terms of budget balance, but which aren't very meaningful in the real world. I don't blame the CBO for that, they didn't draft the bill, and they don't get to decide the rules for their analysis.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News