Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Credo Mobile

HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy

Regulatory Policy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

Demanding a federal budget that is fair, responsible, and meets our nation's priorities

Home :  Federal Budget & Tax : 
Federal Budget & Tax:      News     Blog     Background    



Friday, May 09, 2008

War Supplemental Update: Blue Dogs Balk at Waiving PAYGO for GI Bill Extension

Just when Democratic House leadership thought it was safe to bring a $183.6* billion war supplemental spending bill to the House floor for a vote, the Blue Dog coalition bares their teeth. We briefly mentioned yesterday that the coalition has expressed their displeasure that an expansion of college benefits for veterans would not be offset. By signaling that they would not support the rules package under which the war supp would be debated, they have induced Democratic leadership to find offsets, thus postponing a vote until at least next week.

The provision is question is know in the Senate as the Post 9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 (S. 22), a bill introduced by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) and cosponsored by 57 senators. The CBO scored the bill as costing $40 million the first year, $680 million the second, and totalling almost $52 billion over ten years.

Blue Dogs' insistence on offsetting these costs has drawn the ire of the Out of Iraq Caucus. Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) was incredulous ($). "How can the Blue Dog Coalition possibly say that an expansion of education benefits is too costly when their votes to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to fight in Iraq violate the same pay-as-you-go rules they claim to so deeply respect? It's an inconsistent logic."

But, is Hinchey right to insist the Blue Dogs selectively apply PAYGO?

*That's the commonly-used dollar amount in press accounts. That number, however, does not include $11 billion for extended unemployment benefits (over 10 ten years) and $720 million for expanded GI Bill benefits (over 2 years). With those factored in, the bill would be about $200 billion



Continue reading...

Posted by Craig Jennings, 02:55:31 PM



Housing Debate: Real(i)ty Trumps Ideology

Most of the reasons offered up by President Bush and congressional opponents of the housing crisis plan sponsored by House Financial Services Committee chair Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) have a yellow, off-tone ring to them. You hear that it's a bailout, that it rewards the miscreants who bamboozled homeowners into predatory loans, that it tosses the burden of foreclosure risk onto innocent taxpayers, that the administration has already tried it, that it is already working, that it won't work, that it will work and cost us -- enough reasons to suggest that unreasoned ideological skeevies are at play.

All well and good. But while President Bush has the luxury of ideology -- his name will never be on a ballot again -- this is not true of his GOP colleagues in the House and Senate, where election-year concessions to reality regarding the survival of the realty market (see this must-read story in today's NY Times) and of members of Congress themsleves trump adherence to a stubborn, shop-worn, incoherent set of empty shibboleths.

But Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-OH) wasn't making any quiet concessions yesterday, as he defended his vote, one of 39 from GOP House members, in support of the Frank bill:

What's offensive is some of the rhetoric. They say it rewards speculators. No, it doesn't. It's limited to homeowners. They say it's a $300 billion bailout. No, it's not. It costs $1.7 billion. Would I have written the bill the way Chairman Frank did? No, but we're not in charge anymore... People are expecting us to do something.

A growing number of GOP congressional incumbents doubt that another veto threat by the president would qualify as "something."



Posted by Dana Chasin, 09:38:13 AM



DAILY FISCAL POLICY REPORT -- May 9, 2008

Housing -- House Passes Two Key Housing Bills: Yesterday, the House passed the first two bills to clear the chamber addressing the nation's housing sector crisis. The first, the Neighborhood Stabilization Act, which was adopted 239-188, establishes a $15 billion, HUD-administered loan and grant program for the purchase and rehabilitation of vacant, foreclosed homes. The second, an FHA mortgage refinance program providing up to $300 billion in loan guarantees at a cost of $1.7 billion over five years, passed 266-154. Bill Summary. Both bills face veto threats.

Farm Bill -- Compromise Reached but Bush Promises Veto: After months of negotiations, congressional leaders announced yesterday that they had concluded a compromise on H.R. 2419, providing a five-year farm policy measure with some reforms, including lowered income threshold for eligibility to receive farm payments and an optional crop revenue program. The final votes will be watched for the possibility of an override of a veto promised by President Bush. Story.

Infrastructure -- CBO Chief Doubts Stimulus Value: Peter Orszag, director of the Congressional Budget Office, said yesterday that it was unclear how quickly federal infrastructure projects could provide a boost to the economy, as some lawmakers have suggested, because they can often have lengthy planning and permitting stages. "How quickly, if you're going to spend $100 on this project, what share of that $100 will you get out the door rapidly?" he asked at a joint hearing of the House Budget Committee and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Testimony and Charts.



Posted by Dana Chasin, 09:12:34 AM



Thursday, May 08, 2008

House Passes First of Housing Bills, 239-188

This afternoon, the House adopted the first in a set of housing-related bills, H.R. 5818, the Neighborhood Stabilization Act, by a vote of 239-188. The bill would establish a $15 billion, HUD-administered loan and grant program for the purchase and rehabilitation of vacant, foreclosed homes with the goal of occupying them as soon as possible. One half of the funds ($7.5 billion) would be for loans; half ($7.5 billion) would be for grants.

The bill:

  • allocates the loan and grants based on a state's percentage of foreclosures over the last four calendar quarters and the number of subprime loans delinquent over 90 days. States then allocate funds to government entities or for profit and nonprofit organizations for the purchase, rehabilitation, and resale of housing and the purchase, rehabilitation, and operation of rental housing
  • provides revenues to the federal government from resale or, for rental properties, refinance proceeds. Loans for homeownership properties must be repaid within three years. For rental properties, the maximum loan term is five years. The federal government would receive up to 50 percent of any appreciation an owner realizes at resale
  • targets housing to low-income families and families. Homes must be sold to families with incomes that do not exceed 140 percent of local area median income (AMI). Rental housing must serve families having incomes at or below local AMI

For descriptions of the set of housing-related bills, including H.R. 5818, the American Housing Rescue and Foreclosure Prevention Act (H.R. 3221), and Tax Provisions to Expand Refinancing Opportunities and Spur Home Buying (H.R. 5720), click here.



Posted by Dana Chasin, 05:33:04 PM



Monthly Budget Review: April, 2008

Receipts from tax returns filed by the April 15 deadline were about 6 percent higher than such receipts last year, about what CBO anticipated when it prepared its most recent budget projections in March. Nevertheless, the federal government recorded a deficit of $151 billion for the first seven months of fiscal year 2008, CBO estimates—$70 billion more than the shortfall incurred in the same period last year.

...

Because of the large inflow of tax payments due by April 15, the government runs a budget surplus in April. This year, that surplus was $160 billion, CBO estimates, or $17 billion less than the surplus recorded in the same month last year. That reduction was due to the effect of the calendar on the timing of certain outlays.

...

Through April, withholding of income and payroll taxes rose by about $49 billion (or nearly 5 percent), reflecting continued increases in wages and salaries. Those receipts grew at a slower rate than the nearly 7 percent increase recorded in both 2006 and 2007.

CBO: Monthly Budget Review


Posted by Craig Jennings, 03:48:18 PM



California City Declares Bankruptcy, Citing Housing, Economy

The New York Times reports today that the Vallejo (CA) City Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to declare bankruptcy in the face of dwindling tax revenues, the housing market meltdown and a faltering economy. Vallejo has 117,000 residents.

Given the steep decrease in property and sales taxes and transfer fees as a result of weakness in the housing market, municipal bankruptcy is "something that one hears about a lot more now," said John Quigley, a professor of economics at University of California, Berkeley. "And in California, you hear about a lot of cities being pushed to this sort of thinking by the housing crisis."

"We've been doing more with less forever," said Detective Mat Mustard, vice president of the Vallejo Police Officers Association, which opposed the bankruptcy declaration. "We're going to start losing people. Who wants to work for a company or a city that's bankrupt?"



Posted by Dana Chasin, 11:07:49 AM



DAILY FISCAL POLICY REPORT -- May 8, 2008

War Supplemental -- Blue Dogs Hold Line on PAYGO: Frustrating House Democratic leadership efforts to bring to a vote on the $183.6 billion war supplemental spending bill to the House floor today, the Blue Dog coalition is balking at supporting the rules under which the bill would be considered. Their concern is that a measure to increase GI Bill funding violates pay-as-you-go rules, because it would be a new entitlement not be offset by revenue increases or spending decreases.

Taxes -- Senate Dems Push Windfall Profits Tax on Big Oil: Yesterday, Senate Democrats unveiled legislation that would levy a new 25 percent tax on major oil-producing companies that do not reinvest their profits in increased capacity or renewable energy technologies and repeal a tax deduction provided to them as manufacturers of oil and gas products. The Consumer-First Energy Act would use the revenues from the 25 percent "Windfall Profits Tax" for new consumer price protections, and renewable energy development and energy efficiency technologies. The repeal of the Section 199 manufacturing tax credit for the five largest oil and gas companies would raise $17 billion over 10 years to pay for the energy independence trust fund.

Taxes -- New York Senate Adopts Gas Tax Holiday: The New York State Senate approved a bill yesterday that would create a "summer gas tax holiday" by eliminating three state taxes on motor fuel. The bill would suspend 32 cents per gallon in taxes from Memorial Day through Labor Day. While the bill passed the Republican-controlled Senate by a vote of 46-15, it is expected to die in the Democratic-controlled state Assembly. Sen. Liz Krueger (D), an opponent of the bill, said it was "obviously meant to prey on the desperate need for relief of New York's suffering drivers."

Posted by Dana Chasin, 10:13:17 AM



Wednesday, May 07, 2008

UI Extension: Does the Unemployment Rate Matter?

Since the beginning of the year, when talk of a recession was first heard, Congress has been debating whether or to extend unemployment insurance (UI) benefits by 13 weeks -- as it has done during every single recession, with one exception, for the past 50 years.

The principal objection to such a proposal, which Bush opposed in the winter stimulus package is, as the White House press secretary said last month, that the president doesn't believe the extension is needed, "given that the unemployment rate that we have is historically and relatively low at just over 5 percent." (Note that the first bill Bush signed after the election of a GOP Congress in 2003 was -- that's right -- a 13-week unemployment insurance extension... when the rate was 5.8 percent.)

But increasingly, the focus of the UI extension debate is shifting away from the unemployment rate to what seems like a more logical barometer of the need for an extension: how long it takes to find a new job.

The latest voice to join that chorus is mainstream economics writer Robert Samuelson, opining in today's Washington Post:

When benefits were extended in early 2002, the unemployment rate was 5.7 percent. In 1991 the extension occurred at 7 percent. But so what?

What's wrong with this argument is that it ignores basic changes in U.S. labor markets. Over the past two decades, American businesses have gradually toughened their hiring and firing policies. In recessions, they resort more to permanent dismissals as opposed to temporary layoffs; in recoveries, they're more cautious in adding new workers.

It's harder to find a new job. Average spells of unemployment have slowly lengthened. The increase since 1960 has been about six weeks, estimates economist Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution.

Nearly 1.4 million U.S. workers qualified as long-term jobless at the beginning of the year, more than twice as many as when the recession started in March 2001 -- and more than the 1.3 million who were long-term jobless the last time Congress temporarily extended benefits, in March 2002. In this environment, is the unemployment rate, per se, a logical reason not to extend unemployment benefits?



Posted by Dana Chasin, 03:21:09 PM



More on the OSC Raids

Yesterday, we noted that the FBI raided the home and office of Office of Special Counsel Scott Bloch. More news reports on the raids are out today. It appears that raids are part of a grand jury subpoenas related to the OSC's investigation of the use of federal resources for political activities by the White House, including Bloch's investigation of now-fired GSA head Lurita Doan.

The participation of the FBI and the grand jury, which is empaneled in Washington, indicates investigators are weighing criminal charges related to the [Office of Personnel Management] IG probe [of allegations by former OSC employees who say Bloch retaliated against them], such as obstruction of justice.

But OSC employees said the grand jury subpoenas seek a wide range of information that goes beyond Bloch's deletion of computer files or treatment of agency employees.

Investigators have demanded all files on OSC's investigation last year into allegations of improper political activity by Lurita Doan, the former head of the General Services Administration, who was forced to resign last week by the White House.

This bit in the CongressDaily (via GovExec) article deserves highlighting:

Republicans and other critics also have criticized Bloch for launching a wider investigation into political briefings White House officials conducted across the federal government. They have accused Bloch of trying to use the probe as leverage against possible moves by the White House to force his ouster due to his conduct at OSC.

Anyway, here are a couple more articles on the raids:

The New York Times, "F.B.I. Raids Office of Special Counsel"
McClatchy, "FBI agents sweep office, home of government watchdog"



Posted by Craig Jennings, 01:26:59 PM



Bush Issues Veto Threat Against Frank Housing Bill
But It May Not Turn Out to be a Veto Promise

After sending mixed signals for weeks about H.R. 5830, the Frank FHA mortgage refinaince loan guarantee program, President Bush issued a Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) opposing a number of provisions in the housing stimulus package (H.R. 3221) being considered on the House floor today and declaring that he would veto the package in its current form.

Ironically, the elements in the bill intended to draw bipartisan support are "modernizing" the FHA and more stringent oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) that guarantee the purchase and sale of home mortgages in the secondary market. But the administration statement called the inclusion of FHA modernization and GSE reform "largely symbolic" and said Frank's FHA rescue plan "would force FHA and taxpayers to take on excessive risk, and jeopardize FHA's financial solvency."

Yet, even in the worse case, the risk to taxpayers as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office could come to as much as $1.7 billion over five years, or roughly $400 million a year. Since there are over 100 million "tax units" in the U.S. (individuals plus households paying taxes), the Frank plan would, at most, cost the average taxpayer $4 dollars a year. How much of a risk is that against the backdrop of what Princeton Prof. Paul Krugman projects will be $6-7 trillion in home equity value lost in the housing crisis?

The SAP may be more of a veto threat than a promise in the end. As Jaret Seiberg, senior vice president at the Stanford Group, a Washington policy research firm told CNN this afternoon, "We see this more as an effort to gain leverage over the final shape of the bill and less about an actual veto. The politics of killing this bill are negative for the Republicans, who very much need to win either Ohio or Florida if they hope to keep the White House in November. Both of those states are suffering severely during the housing mess."

Stay tuned.



Posted by Dana Chasin, 12:59:54 PM



Gas Tax Laugh Tracks

The gas tax holiday proposed by Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) has been universally panned by experts, economists and elitists of all political stripes.

Now comes a novel objection from perhaps the most famous of all pundits, certainly one with a bigger media footprint than all the others who have opined to date.

"The gas tax holiday? It doesn't go far enough!" grouses Stephen Colbert. His argument is neatly laid out in a presentation made to "nation," in Stephen Colbert's Gas Tax Holiday.



Posted by Dana Chasin, 10:51:31 AM



DAILY FISCAL POLICY REPORT -- May 7, 2008

Budget -- Conferees Converge on Compromise, per Conrad: Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) said yesterday that FY09 budget resolution negotiators have only one remaining issue to resolve —— the level of discretionary spending for fiscal 2009 —— before reaching an accord. He said said the difference in discretionary spending between the House and Senate fiscal 2009 budget resolutions is about $1.8 billion now, down from a $4 billion gap at the outset. Background on Budget Debate.

Housing -- CBO Releases Frank Bill Cost Estimate: The Congressional Budget Office has released its long-awaited cost estimate of H.R. 5830, the FHA Housing Stabilization and Homeownership Retention Act of 2008, the bill introduced by House Financial Services Committee chair Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) to create a voluntary FHA mortgage refinance program. The full House will consider the bill today. CBO's estimate of the bill's five-year cost: $2.7 billion.

Supplemental Schedule -- House Vote, Senate Mark-Up Ahead: House Democratic leaders have signaled possible floor action tomorrow on a supplemental appropriations bill that would provide $108.1 billion in fiscal 2008 and $70 billion in 2009 war funding and includes extended unemployment benefits and new education benefits for veterans, upping the price tag above Bush's target. The Senate Appropriations Committee announced plans to mark up its own version of the supplemental tomorrow. CBS News.



Posted by Dana Chasin, 09:59:59 AM



Tuesday, May 06, 2008

War Supplemental Update: Bill Unveiled

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and House Appropriations Chair David Obey (D-WI) told lawmakers today that Democratic House leadership will advance a $183.6 billion war supplemental spending bill. It combines the remainder of President Bush's FY 2008 request and his partial FY 2009 request and will fund the wars in Iraq an Afghanistan through the remainder of Bush's term.

The bill, which could be voted on early as Thursday, includes several domestic spending provisions:

  • $11 billion (over 10 years) for unemployment insurance expansion
  • $720 million (over 2 year) for expanded GI Bill benefits
  • About $1.3 billion in international food aid
  • A Bush-requested $5.8 billion for New Orleans levy repair

To remain under Bush's veto-threatened limit, $3.4 billion less than his request was provided to the military.

CQ Politics, Democrats Unveil War Supplemental Plans
CQ ($), Democrats Unveil War Supplemental Plans
CongressDaily PM ($), Dems Prepare $183.6B Supplemental, May Vote Thursday



Posted by Craig Jennings, 04:54:26 PM



FBI Raids Office of Special Counsel Office, Home

Wow.

FBI agents on Tuesday raided the offices of Special Counsel Scott J. Bloch, who oversees protection for federal whistleblowers. The agents seized computers and shut down email service as part of an obstruction of justice probe, NPR has exclusively learned.

FBI agents also searched Bloch's home and a Special Counsel field office in Dallas. A grand jury in Washington issued subpoenas for several OSC employees, including Bloch, according to NPR sources who spoke on condition their names not be used.

Those developments came about on a Tuesday morning that had seemed no different than any other weekday in the Washington headquarters of the Office of Special Counsel. But at 10 a.m., the OSC's national email system went down, and the FBI arrived.

And from TPM Muckraker, a reminder of what Bloch's deal is:

To refresh your memory, Bloch's agency is a little known one that is charged with investigating whistleblower complaints, Hatch Act violations, and the like -- but who is himself being investigated for retaliating against whistleblowers and politicizing his office. The Office of Personnel Management's inspector general has been conducting that investigation since 2005. The feds are apparently investigating whether Bloch tried to obstruct that investigation by deleting his hard drive, among other things.

To give you an idea how fraught this investigation is with unique issues, Bloch is not only busily investigating the White House for political briefings Karl Rove and his aides made to various agencies, but he's also conducting an investigation of the politicization at the Department of Justice and issues related to the U.S. Attorney firings -- a probe that he complained was being blocked by the DoJ. Of course, he can't do much to block the DoJ investigation of him.

We last wrote about Bloch in November, when the WSJ reported that he was being investigated for shredding documents (i.e. "a 'seven-level' wipe [of several office hard drives]: a thorough scrubbing that conforms to Defense Department data-security standards).



Posted by Craig Jennings, 04:19:06 PM



Fed Chief's Opinions on Foreclosure Remedies Differ from Frank Bill Oponents

Congressional opposition to the Frank housing bill is coalescing around apparently dubious propositions ($).

[Antonia Ferrier, spokeswoman for House Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO)] also took aim at the [Rep. Barney] Frank proposal. "This bill perversely rewards those who borrowed more than they could afford — their monthly mortgage payments get reduced with the government footing the bill. How is that fair to the millions of Americans who worked hard and paid their mortgages on time? And who ends up holding the bag if all goes south? No surprise, the American taxpayer."

Meanwhile, economist and Fed Chief Ben Bernanke provides an "expert" opinion:

"High rates of delinquency and foreclosure can have substantial spillover effects on the housing market, the financial markets and the broader economy," [Federal Reserve Chairman Ben] Bernanke said Monday..."Therefore, doing what we can to avoid preventable foreclosures is not just in the interest of lenders and borrowers. It's in everybody's interest," he said.

...

The current housing crises has clobbered some borrowers home prices dropped. That left them with mortgages that are bigger than the value of their home. When that's the primary problem, Bernanke said the best solution may be reducing the amount that the borrower owes on the loan or some other permanent modification to the loan.

Fine. Helping distressed homeowners can help everyone. But surely we cannot stand in the way of the the almighty market! That would be disaster.

Republican talking points obtained by Roll Call also suggested housing prices must fall further rather than be propped up by a new government program, an argument also made by [Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL)] Shelby.

"The correction in the housing market is a necessary reaction to a prolonged period of reckless lending and borrowing practices that helped take housing prices to levels that were simply unsustainable. For the market to stabilize, prices will need to return to levels that ordinary Americans can afford," the talking points read.

Or not.

Rising foreclosures add to the glut of unsold homes and that put more downward pressure on prices, aggravating the housing slump, he said. More rapid declines in house prices could have an "adverse impact" on the broader economy and the stability of the financial system, [Bernanke] said.

Photo by Flickr user msabcmom used under a Creative Commons license



Posted by Craig Jennings, 03:11:23 PM




Latest Entries by Theme

All Themes

Appropriations & Spending

Federal Tax Policy

Income/Wealth Inequality

Budget Projections

Government Performance

Estate Tax

State Fiscal Policy

Watcher

Entitlements

Budget Process

Debt & Deficit

Oversight & Enforcement

Transparency

Privatization

Contact Us

Most Recent Entries for Federal Budget & Tax

War Supplemental Update: Blue Dogs Balk at Waiving PAYGO for GI Bill Extension

Housing Debate: Real(i)ty Trumps Ideology

DAILY FISCAL POLICY REPORT -- May 9, 2008

House Passes First of Housing Bills, 239-188

Monthly Budget Review: April, 2008

California City Declares Bankruptcy, Citing Housing, Economy

DAILY FISCAL POLICY REPORT -- May 8, 2008

UI Extension: Does the Unemployment Rate Matter?

More on the OSC Raids

Bush Issues Veto Threat Against Frank Housing Bill

Archived Entries for Federal Budget & Tax

May

April

March

February

January

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

July, 2006

June, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

March, 2006

February, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

May, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004

October, 2004

September, 2004

August, 2004

July, 2004

June, 2004

May, 2004

April, 2004

March, 2004

February, 2004

January, 2004

December, 2003

November, 2003

October, 2003

September, 2003

August, 2003

July, 2003