The True Cost of Playing Baseline Games
It is news to no one here that lawmakers love tweaking the rules, and right now they are eyeing the budget assumptions Congress has used for decades to judge the fiscal impact of their policies. We have spilled quite a bit of ink on the topic.
In a recent op-ed, AV Vice President for Public Finance Andrew Moylan points out that while a “current policy” baseline may seem appealing, especially to those who support extending pro-growth tax policies, it’s ultimately a gimmick that creates a misleading picture of our fiscal outlook. It would do more than just distort the picture when analyzing extension of TCJA; it could open the floodgates to even bigger “cost-free” deficit explosions down the road. And, to quote ourselves, “Using one approach over another does nothing to change how much we spend, how much revenue comes in, and how much debt we need to float to cover the difference between the two.”
For those so inclined, AV Program Integrity Fellow Doug Criscitello wrote a deeper dive on the topic that outlines the history of the issue and provides some case studies, while AV Executive Vice President for Public Finance George Callas takes aim at the most egregiously misleading assertions about the merits of current policy in a myth-busting piece you will definitely want to read.
Expect more on this topic since budget wars never really end, they just reduce in intensity. And hey, if metaphors are your thing, the Upshot has a fun list to add some levity to the baseline conversation.
|