house Bill H.R. 4361
Should Federal Budget Estimates Analyze a Bill's Overall Economic Impact?
Argument in favor
Major tax and spending legislation should be scored dynamically so that lawmakers can consider its impact on employment, economic output, interest rates, and tax revenue.
···
11/24/2017
Having a non-partisan analysis of the potential impact on the nation and its citizens should be table stakes for any proposals
11/24/2017
Deeper and wider analysis of a bill’s impact should make voters and Congress think longer and harder about moving to implement it. Granted, this only works if you put stock in objective analysis and rigorous critical thinking; a hard sell in today’s political environment.
Argument opposed
Dynamic scoring diverts from traditional budget estimates of a bill’s impact to project economic conditions that are highly uncertain, and generally portray tax cuts too favorably.
···
11/24/2017
This bill is introduced by a Republican, therefore I immediately suspect its premise as one to dismantle the social network. Aha! I am correct. Look, healthcare is expensive, it just is. It will be paid for off the backs of those who are healthier and wealthier because it SHOULD BE. Our constitution says in the preamble that we should promote a more perfect union by promoting the general Welfare of no less than we the people. That means all of us. We don’t complain about car insurance because we understand that you pay into a big pot so, if you should need money to cover an accident, you have it. Health insurance (the Affordable Care Act), is exactly the same. I have no idea why this is so unbelievable to some people. Stop it with this crazy need to prove that healthcare is expensive. We know it is, and frankly, caring for each other should make more sense than not caring for each other. I urge you, Rob Portman and Brad Wenstrup, to vote against this nonsensical election bill. Do something good - support the ACA until we can establish Medicare for all.
11/24/2017
I like the general idea, but not who conducts it. Give an independent agency rather than a house committee this power and I would consider it.
···
11/24/2017
I agree that there is a certain level of prudence that should be associated with all tax legislation; however, for the BES or CBO to coordinate any quantitative analysis or research would require increasing efforts for legislation that is not guaranteed to pass a vote. Referendums and amendments are made in great number. And the frequency of legislation introduced in a session can be overwhelming. The macroeconomic effects of deficit or budget legislation should be debated and discussed during the regular order of both the Senate and House before the fact; not after the legislation has been voted on.
Having a non-partisan analysis of the potential impact on the nation and its citizens should be table stakes for any proposals
This bill is introduced by a Republican, therefore I immediately suspect its premise as one to dismantle the social network. Aha! I am correct. Look, healthcare is expensive, it just is. It will be paid for off the backs of those who are healthier and wealthier because it SHOULD BE. Our constitution says in the preamble that we should promote a more perfect union by promoting the general Welfare of no less than we the people. That means all of us. We don’t complain about car insurance because we understand that you pay into a big pot so, if you should need money to cover an accident, you have it. Health insurance (the Affordable Care Act), is exactly the same. I have no idea why this is so unbelievable to some people. Stop it with this crazy need to prove that healthcare is expensive. We know it is, and frankly, caring for each other should make more sense than not caring for each other. I urge you, Rob Portman and Brad Wenstrup, to vote against this nonsensical election bill. Do something good - support the ACA until we can establish Medicare for all.
I like the general idea, but not who conducts it. Give an independent agency rather than a house committee this power and I would consider it.
Deeper and wider analysis of a bill’s impact should make voters and Congress think longer and harder about moving to implement it. Granted, this only works if you put stock in objective analysis and rigorous critical thinking; a hard sell in today’s political environment.
I agree that there is a certain level of prudence that should be associated with all tax legislation; however, for the BES or CBO to coordinate any quantitative analysis or research would require increasing efforts for legislation that is not guaranteed to pass a vote. Referendums and amendments are made in great number. And the frequency of legislation introduced in a session can be overwhelming. The macroeconomic effects of deficit or budget legislation should be debated and discussed during the regular order of both the Senate and House before the fact; not after the legislation has been voted on.
The CBO should be included in every bill that deals with tax
The current tax cutting bill for the wealthy should be in the shredder. This bill should be an embarrassment to congress& they should be ashamed. Thank goodness for Democrats who refuse to take part in ruining America.
Estimates can be part of the overall review process but to judge a bill solely on estimates of economic impact is foolish. Facts should take precedent. Yes, some economic factors can only be estimated. However, if a bill was judged solely on estimates Congress or any President could easily fudge data to meet their "estimates".
Puhlease, they make it sound like this doesn't already happen. It's just now being made public by OUR administration. Also make the economic impact public before we vote.
Absolutely without hesitation, we all need to know the impact and what is hidden.
Too easy to manipulate the data for whatever purpose the sponsors desire.
If Congress isn’t happy with what they have then they need to authorize something better. Maybe a method that could produce a best and worst case scenario.
My analysis concerning legislative impact: When a shooter goes into an elementary school and endangers the lives of hundreds of children, injuring and killings a “relatively small population”. Americans are united in their response and hatred. 🔌 So, why then aren’t MORE Americans united in their reactions/response to this GOP, when their legislation is the shooter equivalent to endangering 25 to 35 thousand elementary schools filled with students. Risking the lives of ALL the children, yet “only injuring harming or killing a relatively small population.” The GOP’s actions are the very definition of “child endangerment” and need to be prosecuted as such.
Let’s just get to the bottom line, government is way too big and too intrusive and should only be responsible to PROVIDE FOR the defense of the nation and PROMOTE for the general welfare of the nation. Promote must be understood as not to provide. Cut out all that is not Constitutionally based and our nation will be restored.
Putin/republicans are lying and taking 80% of the tax cuts along with cutting social security, medicare and medicaid. they are laying the groundwork to privatize veterans benefit , which is another way of saying "take the money for themselves." Watch in countable what congress is doing, every week they destroy another part of the system that govern us and take it for themselves! Every single bill, every single bill they author hurts true Americans. money came to republicans through Putin, which is why they are doing everything possible to stop the investigations. Dynamic scoring diverts from traditional budget estimates of a bill’s impact to project economic conditions that are highly uncertain, and generally portray tax cuts too favorably.
This bill would provide another way to view the effect of
Sorry, but this is not possible to do, too many variables. This legislation is different than dynamic scoring of budgetary items directly tied to the federal government. In addition, where this possible it would take so long and be subject to unbelievable nit picking that the legislative process would be even slower than it is now.
Until republicans start working together for a better country instead of working on repealing everything done in the past eight years, I vote no to every bill sponsored by a republican.
The more information about financial and economic impact of legislation, the more informed our legislators can be in voting and our citizens can be in advocating.
An impact analysis should be done for any bill and this information should be made public and reported in the news media. This type of information just makes good common sense (something that the Republicans and Trump lack).