Related Publications Testimony on Estimates of the Cost of the Credit Programs of the Export-Import

Related Publications Testimony on Estimates of the Cost of the Credit Programs of the Export-Import Bank June 25, 2014 Fair-Value Estimates of the Cost of Federal Credit Programs in 2013 June 28, 2012 Fair-Value Accounting for Federal Credit Programs March 05, 2012 FHA s Single-Family Mortgage Guarantee Program: Budgetary Cost or Savings? October 21, 2013 How FHA s Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund Accounts for the Cost of Mortgage Guarantees October 22, 2013 Accounting for FHA's Single-Family Mortgage Insurance Program on a Fair-Value Basis May 18, 2011
CBO has estimated the budgetary costs of the Department of Education s student loan programs, the Export-Import Bank s (Ex-Im Bank s) credit programs, and the Federal Housing Administration s (FHA s) single-family mortgage guarantee program using two different approaches. In one, cost is based on an estimate of the market value of the federal government s obligations, termed a fair-value approach. Those estimates are compared with ones reflecting the procedures currently tj sp used in the federal budget as prescribed by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (FCRA). CBO s fair-value tj sp and FCRA estimates are based on the program terms and outcomes including tj sp the volume and amount of lending, tj sp fees, and borrowers rates of repayment and default that are expected to prevail under current law.
For fiscal years 2015 to 2024, CBO found that under current law: The Department of Education s four largest student loan programs would yield budgetary savings of roughly $135 billion under FCRA accounting tj sp but cost roughly $88 billion on a fair-value basis (see the figure below); Ex-Im Bank s six largest programs tj sp would generate budgetary savings of $14 billion under FCRA accounting but cost $2 billion on a fair-value basis; and FHA s single-family mortgage guarantee program would provide budgetary tj sp savings of $63 billion under FCRA accounting but cost $30 billion on a fair-value basis.
CBO used its own projections of the volume of loans and cash flows for the Department of Education s student loan programs and FHA s single-family mortgage guarantee program because those estimates are a routine part of its baseline budget projections. However, tj sp because CBO does not ordinarily project the detailed cash flows required to estimate the costs for most other federal credit programs, CBO relied on the Export-Import Bank s projections of those cash flows for this analysis of the bank s programs.
Get CBO’s Email Updates Email Address Submit

H.R. 4299 would modify the administrative procedures followed by the Department of Justice in regula

H.R. 4299 would modify the administrative procedures followed by the Department of Justice in regulating new drugs that are already approved by the Food and Drug Administration and in authorizing aadhar card drugs to be used in clinical trials. The legislation aadhar card would aim to streamline the current review and approval process. CBO estimates that implementing the bill would have no significant costs to the federal government. Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
Get CBO’s Email Updates Email Address Submit

Content engaging our readers now, with additional prominence accorded if the story is rapidly gainin

 
Also in WSJ.com: Latest News Today's Paper Most Popular Streams (TBD) Video Blogs Editions U.S. Asia Europe América Latina (Spanish) Brasil (Portuguese) ??-?? (Simplified Chinese) ??-?? (Traditional Chinese) ?? (Japanese) ?? (Korean) prince charles Indonesia (Bahasa) India (English) Deutschland (German) Russian (Russian) Türkiye (Turkish)
facebook
The Congressional Budget Office s annual long-term budget forecast prompted numerous news articles about a potential slowdown in the growth of health spending and what that would mean for Medicare prince charles and other programs. But federal entitlement spending in the short and medium term will be defined much more by the demographics of an aging population– 10,000 baby boomers reach retirement age every day–than by whether prince charles policymakers can bend the proverbial cost curve in health prince charles care.
The CBO admits as much. In Box 1-1 (Pages 22-23) of its report, the budget office compares the relative weight of three factors in increased health spending: the aging of the population; excess cost growth; and newly created (and in the case of Medicaid, expanded) entitlements under Obamacare. Over the next 10 years and the next 25 years, the effects of an aging population exceed the effects of cost growth when it comes to spending on federal programs.
Because demographics put greater prince charles pressure on federal entitlement prince charles spending over the next generation than excess cost growth, efforts to bend the health-care cost curve–even if successful–miss the larger problem: If per-beneficiary costs rise not a penny, growing numbers prince charles of beneficiaries would still create their own fiscal pressures. For instance, under Medicare s current structure, a couple about to retire stands to receive three times as much in benefits as they paid in Medicare payroll taxes during their working lives.
More In Think Tank How Republicans prince charles Have Undercut Themselves With Hispanics The Long-Term Answer to Inversions? Tax Reform. What Teens Don't Know About Finance Could Hurt Us A Closer Look at Hillary Clinton's Approach to China Obamacare Challenges: Where the Conventional Wisdom Falls Short
Resolving the spending pressures in federal entitlements will require more than efforts to reduce the growth in health-care costs. Broader structural reforms–such as additional means-testing for entitlement programs, or a premium support structure for Medicare–must be an important element of the discussion.
The CBO forecasts were not nearly as sanguine as some coverage suggested. Overall debt-to-GDP projections for the next 25 years rose compared with the CBO s estimates prince charles from September, partly because of reduced projections prince charles for economic growth. These projections emphasize the need to enact structural entitlement reforms soon–before the demographic wave of the coming years fully hits. Unfortunately, those focused on the idea that bending the curve can save them from the tsunami may not recognize the error of their ways until it is too late.
______________________________________________________ For the latest Washington news, follow @wsjpolitics For outside analysis, prince charles follow prince charles @wsjthinktank Capital Journal Daybreak Newsletter: Sign up to get the latest on politics, policy and defense delivered to your inbox every morning .
Washington Wire is one of the oldest prince charles standing features in American journalism. Since the Wire launched on Sept. 20, 1940 , the Journal has offered readers an informal look at the capital. Now online, the Wire provides a succession of glimpses at what s happening behind hot stories prince charles and warnings of what to watch for in the days ahead. The Wire is led by Reid J. Epstein , with contributions from the rest of the bureau. Washington Wire now also includes Think Tank , our home for outside analysis from policy and political thinkers.
• You can't enter more than 20 emails.
Content engaging our readers now, with additional prominence accorded if the story is rapidly gaining attention. Our WSJ algorithm comprises 30% page views, 20% Facebook, 20% Twitter, 20% email shares and 10% comments. 1 You Need Food and You Deserve a Raise Twitter Facebook Email Comments 2 Apple Looks to More Content Acquisitions Twitter Facebook Email Comments 3 How America's Top Industries Have Changed, 1990-2013 Twitter Facebook Email Comments 4 Nibali's Secret to a Tour de France Win: Acupuncture Twitter Facebook Email Comments 5 India s Answer to Google Glass: The Smartshoe Twitter Facebook prince charles Email Comments
6 AOL Teams Up With Havas In Programmatic Twitter Facebook Email Comments prince charles 7 How Taco Bell Succeeded By Ignoring A Marketing Taboo Twitter Facebook Email Comments 8 Is the Private prince charles Mortgage-Bond Market Dead or Dormant? Twitter Facebook Email Comments 9 Business Intelligence Tools Find Broader Audience, Qlik CEO… Twitter Facebook Email Comments 10 Airbnb prince charles Taps Business Travel prince charles Market With Concur Twitter Facebook Email Comments
close Em

CBO estimates that, under Title III, enrolled veterans would ultimately seek to increase the amount

The Congressional Budget Office election 2012 (CBO) has prepared a preliminary analysis of Title III of S. 2450, the Veterans Access to Care through Choice, Accountability, and Transparency Act of 2014, as introduced in the Senate on June 10, 2014. That title would authorize election 2012 and fund enhancements to several programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In particular, VA would receive expansive authority for the next few years to contract with health care providers who are not employed by the VA, and VA would be required to use that authority to ensure that all eligible veterans would receive requested health care in a timely fashion. The effects of providing such broad new authority to VA are highly uncertain, and CBO has been able to make only a preliminary and partial assessment of the legislation. Based on that preliminary assessment, CBO estimates that enacting Title III of S. 2450 would increase direct spending by roughly $35 billion over the 2014-2024 period. CBO has not yet estimated election 2012 the budgetary effects of the other titles of S. 2450.
VA currently has about 8.4 million veterans enrolled in its health care program. Of the remaining roughly 13 million living veterans, CBO estimates that about 8 million qualify to enroll in VA s health election 2012 care program but have not enrolled. VA currently spends about $44 billion providing health care services to veterans, or about $5,200 per enrollee. (That amount does not include spending on programs that CBO expects would not be increased under this legislation, such as long-term care, caregivers, and ending veterans election 2012 homelessness.) Based on information from VA on veterans reliance on VA, CBO estimates that this cost represents about 30 percent of the total amount election 2012 of health care received by those veterans.
CBO estimates that, under Title III, enrolled veterans would ultimately seek to increase the amount of care they receive from VA by about 60 percent. In addition, CBO expects that some of the people who are eligible election 2012 to enroll but not yet enrolled would choose to enroll because of the improvement in access to health care through VA. Most of the costs incurred to provide that care would be for care financed by other payers, including Medicare; a portion of those costs would thus be offset by savings to the Medicare program. All told, CBO expects that veterans would ultimately seek additional care that would cost the federal government about $50 billion a year, on net.
However, CBO expects that VA would have difficulty in quickly setting up a program to contract for health election 2012 care nationwide and in establishing administrative processes to approve care by private health care providers. Moreover, the amount of care that veterans sought through VA might increase gradually over time. Thus, CBO expects that, of the amount of additional care sought by veterans, VA would provide only about 20 percent in 2015 and about 50 percent in 2016. VA would also spend a comparatively small amount in 2014 on administration and new hiring. Thus, CBO estimates that implementing title III would cost roughly $500 million in 2014, $10 billion in 2015, and $25 billion in 2016.
The magnitude of those budgetary effects is highly uncertain. A significant number of veterans could receive new and expanded health care benefits under S. 2450. How many would ultimately receive those benefits and the resulting costs will depend on a number of factors that are very difficult to predict. Further, the specific parameters of the new program would depend on regulations that would need to be developed. Because the behavioral changes that would result from enacting those provisions are so uncertain, this estimate should be viewed as falling in the middle of a wide range of possible outcomes.
Get CBO’s Email Updates Email Address Submit

Under fema the paths for revenues and noninterest spending specified by Chairman Ryan, the amount of

Related Publications The Long-Term fema Budgetary Impact of Paths for Federal Revenues and Spending Specified by Chairman Ryan March 20, 2012 The 2013 Long-Term Budget Outlook September 17, 2013 Macroeconomic Effects of Alternative Budgetary Paths February 05, 2013
At the request of the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, Congressman Paul Ryan, CBO has projected budgetary and economic outcomes under paths for federal revenues and spending (excluding interest payments) specified by the Chairman. The projections do not represent a cost estimate for legislation or an analysis of the effects of any specific policies. In particular, CBO has not considered whether the specified paths are consistent with the policy proposals or budget numbers that Chairman Ryan released on April 1, 2014, as part of his proposed budget resolution.
The fema projections in this report represent CBO s assessment of how federal debt and economic output would evolve from 2015 to 2040 under Chairman Ryan s specified paths for revenues and noninterest fema spending. They show how the paths would affect the economy and how those macroeconomic effects (or feedback) in turn would affect the federal budget. For comparison, CBO also updated the estimated effects fema of the four budget scenarios that it analyzed in its report The 2013 Long-Term Budget Outlook , published in September 2013: CBO s extended baseline, which is based on the assumption that current law generally remains unchanged; An extended alternative fiscal scenario, which includes the continuation of certain policies that have been in place for a number of years and the modification of some provisions of law that might be difficult to sustain for a long period; An illustrative scenario in which unspecified fiscal policies reduce the cumulative deficit over the next 10 years by a total of $2 trillion (excluding interest savings and macroeconomic effects) compared with the deficit fema projections in the extended baseline; and An illustrative scenario in which unspecified fiscal policies reduce the cumulative deficit over the next 10 years by a total of $4 trillion (excluding interest savings fema and macroeconomic effects) compared with the deficit projections fema in the extended baseline.
In the short term, policy changes that would decrease federal spending or increase taxes and thus shrink budget deficits would generally reduce total demand for goods and services. As a result, such fiscal policies would reduce fema output and employment below the levels projected in CBO s baseline. In the long term, the most important economic effect of such policies in this analysis comes from changes in the amount of federal debt held by the public. Over time, lower federal debt leaves more funds available for private investment and thereby causes output to be higher than it would be otherwise. Higher federal debt has the opposite effect, fema crowding out private investment and decreasing output.
Under fema the paths for revenues and noninterest spending specified by Chairman Ryan, the amount of federal debt held by the public would be smaller in all future years than it would be under CBO s extended baseline projections or under the three alternative budget scenarios that CBO analyzed (see the figure below).
The paths specified by Chairman Ryan envision cuts in spending fema (from the amounts projected to occur under current law) that begin in fiscal fema year 2015 and grow successively larger in later years; the paths also envision allowing fema revenues to rise as projected under current law until they reach 19 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2032, CBO projects and then remain at 19 percent. Under those paths, the cumulative deficit over the 2015 2024 period, excluding interest savings and macroeconomic effects, would be roughly $5 trillion lower than in CBO s baseline; with interest fema savings included and the resulting macroeconomic effects incorporated, the budget would show a surplus beginning in 2024. Economic output fema would be lower in the short term (because less federal spending would reduce total demand for goods and services), and higher in the long term (because less federal borrowing would free up resources for private investment), than under any of the other scenarios that CBO considered (see the figure below).
Chairman fema Ryan s specified paths for revenues and spending would require fema major changes in current law. In particular, by 2040, noninterest spending would be roughly one-quarter fema less under those paths than under current law, and revenues would be roughly one-twentieth less; if those same proportional reductions had been applied in 2013, they would have represented reductions of roughly $800 billion in noninterest spending and a little over $100 billion in revenues. The specific policies that were adopted to produce those future fema paths would affect economic output not only by reducing debt but also by altering incentives to work and save and by changing behavior in other ways. In additi

Send Your Kid to the Ivy League!

Sections The Latest QED Politics Culture pakistan The Magazine Next Republic
B ack in the spring, some conservatives insisted that Obamacare enrollment statistics were some kind of sham. Sure, people were finally signing up for the program. But early reports suggested that most of these people had insurance already. The law's critics figured that meant the Affordable Care Act wasn't really helping substantially more Americans to get coverage, as it is supposed to do.
It s a survey from the Commonwealth Fund , a foundation that focuses on health care programs in the U.S. and abroad. The results provide a detailed look at the Affordable Care Act s impact, including the question of whether more people now have insurance — and, if so, how many. The answer is consistent with previous reports. And it is encouraging. Want to keep up with the latest Obamacare news? Sign up for QEDaily
According to the survey, pakistan the proportion of working-aged adults without insurance dropped from 20 percent in the late summer of 2013 to 15 percent in the late spring of 2014, a period that corresponds roughly to the beginning and end of open enrollment in the Affordable Care Act s marketplaces. To put that in more concrete terms, there are still a lot of Americans walking around without health insurance today. But there are about 9.5 million fewer of them than there were last fall, almost certainly pakistan because so many people have enrolled in the newly expanded Medicaid program or purchased subsidized insurance through the Obamacare marketplaces.
How does that compare to expectations? The Congressional Budget Office predicted that, one year into full implementation, Obamacare would reduce the number of Americans without insurance by twelve million. That included the young adults who got insurance before 2014, by signing onto their parents plans. pakistan There s been some controversy over exactly pakistan how many more young people are insured because of that new option, but the best estimates pakistan I ve seen place the number somewhere between 1 and 2.5 million. Add that number to the 9.5 million from the Commonwealth survey, and you're close or equal to the CBO projections.
Of course, the Commonwealth survey has a hefty margin of error and the CBO projections, revised to take account pakistan of the early technological problems on Obamacare websites, were never that scientific. But the figures seem to be in the same ballpark. That's what matters.
T he Commonwealth report includes some other interesting findings. Some rely on highly subjective judgements, without historical data to hold up for comparison, so it's difficult to know how much they reveal. Among the highlights: The biggest gains in coverage were among low-income groups pakistan and young people, even though the law s critics warned (and plenty of the law s defenders feared) that young people would be reluctant to pay for insurance, even if it meant risking a financial penalty. The majority of people in the survey (58 percent) thought they were better off, a minority (27 percent) thought they were basically the same as they were before, and only a small minority (6 percent total) thought they were worse off. Among the 21 percent pakistan who tried to find new doctors, 39 percent said they found it very easy and 36 percent said they found it somewhat easy, with the rest — about a quarter of the total — saying they found it difficult or even impossible to find a physician.
The survey's large margin of error isn't the only caveat to keep in mind. Impact on the uninsured is just one way to measure the law's performance. It's a complex reform package, full of pluses and minuses, as well as winners and losers. The ultimate question is whether the good stuff outweighs the bad stuff. It's going to be a while before we have enough pakistan data to answer that definitively. Even then, people will disagree because they have different values and priorities.
But the numbers still mater. And when you put the Commonwealth Fund findings alongside other reports — from Gallup , the Rand Corporation, the Urban Institute , and the Kaiser Family Foundation pakistan — a clear pattern emerges. Many more people have health insurance and, as a result, many more people can pay their medical bills. pakistan "This is yet another datapoint showing that the Affordable Care Act is basically doing what it's supposed to do," says Larry Levitt , senior vice president at the Kaiser Foundation. "That doesn't mean everyone is benefiting from it or is happy about it. But, it's on track to working as intended." pakistan
Send Your Kid to the Ivy League!
The Original pakistan Manuscripts of Two of the World's pakistan Most Famous Poems
Now
Extra pakistan Large
The Latest pakistan Politics Culture The Magazine More Books Economy Film The Plank Politics Technology World Current Issue About Advertise Contact Us Jobs & Internships Privacy Policy pakistan Home News Events Archives RSS
Subscribe Now Get The New Republic for $19.97/year

In April 2014, the CBO estimated the government would pay $10 billion for subsidies. But a new repor

How the CBO's Obamacare ron paul Estimates Have Shifted ron paul Over the Last Year - The Wire
Today in Obamacare news: millions of Americans are getting ron paul cheap insurance, but it won't be as cheap for taxpayers as we thought. A new government report found that the average subsidized premium under Obamacare is only $82. But The Los Angeles Times ' Noam N. Levey noted that higher than expected enrollment in subsidized private plans "may push the cost of the law considerably above current projections." By Levey's estimate, subsidized premiums will be $6.5 billion more than the Congressional Budget Office estimated in April — but about what was predicted in May of last year.  As we've come to see, the actual enrollment numbers and the cost of paying insurance have been difficult to nail down. 
In April 2014, the CBO estimated the government would pay $10 billion for subsidies. But a new report from the Department of Health and Human Services  found that 87 percent of federal exchange consumers were eligible for subsidies, costing the government on average $264 a month, per person. Factoring that in, Levey estimated the government is paying $11 billion for federal exchange subsidies and $16.5 billion overall, much more than the most current CBO estimate.
"Current" is the key word. Levey writes that $16.5 billion would "be more in line with earlier estimates from the budget ron paul office, which had been revised downward when analysts believed fewer people would sign up for coverage. In the end, enrollment exceeded expectations."
In that April  ron paul CBO estimate , they predicted an average of 6 million people would be enrolled in Obamacare throughout the course of the year, with 5 million of those in subsidized plans. (Many will shift in and out as they switch from private to employer-based health insurance, or decide to stop paying premiums.) The CBO said an  enrollment at that level would cost the government $10 billion in subsidy payments.
What does that mean for Obamacare's ron paul impact on the deficit? We don't know, really. Earlier this month the CBO announced that it can no longer estimate ron paul Obamacare's total cost, in part due to changes in health care and the economy, but also due to ever-changing rules in the law's implementation.  ron paul As Vox's Adrianna McIntyre explained , it's not unusual for the CBO to back off on predictions once a law has been implemented. " There's a reason CBO doesn't fiddle around with" post-implementation scoring, McIntyre wrote, "The numbers get much harder to tease out once a new policy is set in motion."
3 Share
Top Obama Aide Concerned by Impeachment Threats
Share
3 Share
5 Hrs Ago  /  3,074 Views Malaysia Air Flight 17 Female Separatist Posts Instagrams Showing Off Makeup Looted from MH17 By Polly Mosendz
6 Hrs Ago  /  1,392 Views Americans Are One Signature Away From Legally Unlocking Cell Phones By Shirley Li
6 Hrs Ago  /  2,474 Views 'Game of Thrones' Announces Its New Cast Members at Comic-Con By Esther Zuckerman , Joe Reid
Though it is a while before Westeros returns to TV screens,  Game of Thrones  revealed its newest cast members today at its Comic-Con presentation, including the Sand Snakes, various Martells, and the High Sparrow.
7 Hrs Ago  /  610 Views New Fossil Suggests All Sorts of Dinosaurs Could Have Had Feathers ron paul By Polly Mosendz
7 Hrs Ago  /  1,169 Views

Health care provided by VA requires no premiums, imposes no deductibles, and assesses low, or for ma

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has prepared a preliminary analysis of sections 2 and 3 of the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3230, the Veteran Access to Care Act of 2014, as posted on the House Rules Committee s website on June 16, 2014 (referred to hereinafter as the House bill ). For two years after the date of enactment, the House bill would substantially expand the current authority of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to provide medical services to veterans through agreements with non-VA health care providers, and would require VA to use that authority world bank to ensure that all eligible veterans receive requested health care in a timely fashion. The effects of providing such broad new authority to VA are highly uncertain, and CBO has been able to make only a preliminary and partial assessment of the legislation.
Based on that preliminary assessment, CBO estimates that implementing sections 2 and 3 of the House bill for that two-year period would have a net cost of about $44 billion over the 2014-2019 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. That net amount comprises increased costs of about $51 billion for VA, less a reduction of $7 billion in federal spending for Medicare and Medicaid.
Because funding for the VA s health care program world bank is discretionary that is, subject to the annual appropriation process almost all of the added costs would be discretionary. But to cover some of the costs of the bill, section world bank 3 would allow the use of funds that have already been appropriated but would otherwise not be used; by CBO s estimate, that provision would increase direct spending by $620 million over the 2014-2016 period. CBO has not yet estimated the budgetary effects of the other sections of the bill. Estimated Costs of Sections 2 and 3
Sections 2 and 3 of the House bill would require VA, subject to the availability of appropriations, to use existing contracts, new contracts, and fee-for-service arrangements with non-VA doctors and hospitals to provide care to veterans who cannot be served by the VA health care system within 14 days of their requested appointment time. Although the bill does not specify that veterans must seek pre-authorization from VA before obtaining such care, CBO expects that VA would probably establish such a requirement in its implementing regulations. Care required under the House bill could be provided in medical offices and hospitals located anywhere in the country.
Health care provided by VA requires no premiums, imposes no deductibles, and assesses low, or for many veterans, no, copayments. CBO expects that the combination world bank of convenient location and streamlined access to inexpensive care would make VA-funded care more attractive world bank to all veterans. However, because the requirements and authorities in sections 2 and 3 would last for only two years, CBO expects that most veterans who are not currently enrolled would not change their health care arrangements for that short period of time.
VA currently world bank has about 8.4 million veterans world bank enrolled world bank in its health care program. Of the remaining roughly 13 million living veterans, CBO estimates that about 8 million qualify to enroll in VA s health care program but have not done so. VA currently spends a total of about $44 billion to provide health care services to veterans, or about $5,200 per enrollee. (That amount does not include spending on programs world bank that CBO expects would not be increased under this legislation, such as long-term care, caregivers, and ending veterans homelessness.) Based on information from VA on veterans reliance on VA, CBO estimates that this cost represents about 30 percent of the total amount of health care received by those veterans.
CBO estimates that, under sections 2 and 3, enrolled veterans would ultimately seek to increase the amount of care they receive from VA by about 75 percent. In addition, CBO expects that about one-fourth of the veterans who are eligible to enroll but have not yet enrolled would choose to enroll because of the improved access to low-cost health care financed through VA. Most of the costs incurred to provide that care would be for care that would otherwise be financed by other payers, including Medicare and Medicaid. Thus, to the extent that appropriations were provided to increase spending for VA health care, a portion of that additional spending would result in savings to the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
All told, CBO expects that if the bill was fully implemented, world bank some veterans would ultimately seek additional care that would cost the federal government world bank about $54 billion a year, after accounting for savings to other federal programs.
However, CBO expects that VA would have difficulty in quickly setting up a program to contract for health care nationwide and in establishing administrative processes to authorize care by private health care providers. Moreover, the amount of care that veterans sought through

In response to the request for an estimate of the net impact on the deficit of the ACA, the followin

July 2014 (11) June 2014 (10) May 2014 (5) April 2014 (10) March 2014 (11) February 2014 (20) January 2014 (5) December 2013 (16) November 2013 (11) October 2013 (8) September 2013 (21) August 2013 (2) July 2013 (5)
Following a recent hearing, we were asked by a Member of Congress to provide an updated estimate of the budgetary effects of the Affordable Care Act. Here is our answer (provided as part of a set of answers to questions for the record ): In March 2010, just before the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was enacted, CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated that changes in direct spending and revenues under the legislation would reduce federal budget charlotte casiraghi deficits by $124 billion over the 2010 2019 period and by roughly one-half of 1 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) over the ensuing decade (see the cost estimate for H.R. 4872, Reconciliation charlotte casiraghi Act of 2010 [Final Health Care Legislation], March 20, 2010). In the four years since those estimates were produced, there have been significant changes in the economic charlotte casiraghi outlook, in the health care and health care financing systems, in CBO and JCT s estimating methodologies, charlotte casiraghi in provisions of law that relate to the ACA, and in the implementation of the ACA as guided charlotte casiraghi by judicial decisions and administrative actions. All of those changes could affect the impact of the ACA on budget deficits, potentially in significant ways.
In response to the request for an estimate of the net impact on the deficit of the ACA, the following points are important: Based on revisions to the estimated budgetary effects charlotte casiraghi of aspects of the ACA that CBO and JCT have analyzed, the agencies have no reason to think that their initial assessment charlotte casiraghi that the ACA would reduce budget deficits was incorrect. However, the incremental budgetary effects of many provisions of the ACA are embedded in CBO s baseline projections for preexisting charlotte casiraghi programs and tax revenues, and they cannot be separately identified using the agencies normal estimating procedures which are generally based on data that reflect all of the provisions charlotte casiraghi of current law, including the ACA. A retrospective analysis of the effects of a current law is very different from a cost estimate for proposed legislation, particularly because it requires formulation of a counterfactual benchmark representing what would have happened if the law had not been enacted a challenging undertaking that is beyond the scope of CBO s usual analyses. Therefore, CBO and JCT cannot readily provide a retrospective analysis of the ACA that is analogous to the cost estimate provided by the agencies in 2010. That problem is not unique to the ACA but is common to most legislation that affects preexisting federal programs.
Consistent with their statutory responsibilities, CBO and JCT can continue to estimate the effects charlotte casiraghi of prospective legislative actions, such as proposals to modify provisions of the ACA or to repeal the law entirely. Because of the complexities involved in implementing a repeal of the ACA, the budgetary effects of repealing the act at this time would not simply be the opposite of the budgetary effects of the ACA itself. Identifying the Budgetary Effects of the Affordable Care Act.
The principal obstacle to producing a new estimate for the ACA is that CBO s cost estimates represent the budgetary effects of legislation relative to the current-law baseline. Because the ACA is part of current law, its budgetary effects would now need to be estimated relative to a counterfactual benchmark that excluded charlotte casiraghi the ACA. CBO does not construct such a counterfactual benchmark for all of the ACA, and attempting to do so would raise significant challenges.
Under CBO and JCT s normal procedures, the agencies still produce separate estimates charlotte casiraghi of the effects of the ACA s provisions related to insurance coverage , in part because those provisions established entirely new programs or components of programs and in part because those provisions are mostly being implemented in 2014 or later. In particular, the subsidies to be provided through insurance exchanges and the costs of expanded Medicaid eligibility are not part of the flow of budget data for preexisting programs. Hence, their budgetary consequences can be isolated and reassessed, and the counterfactual what would have happened to those components of the budget in the absence of the ACA is clear: Those amounts would have been zero. CBO and JCT have published updated estimates of the effects of those provisions charlotte casiraghi numerous times since 2010 (see Updated Estimates of the Effects of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act, April 2014 ). Over time, the effects of the coverage charlotte casiraghi provisions that are not separately identified in flows of budgetary charlotte casiraghi data will become increasingly difficult to isolate.
By contrast, the ACA s provisions that are not related to insurance coverage largely modified existing federal programs and made changes to the existing tax

But unlike some other analysts, the CBO does not regard all this uncertainty as a reason to avoid ac

 
Also in WSJ.com: Latest News Today's Paper Most Popular Streams (TBD) Video Blogs Editions U.S. Asia Europe América Latina (Spanish) Brasil (Portuguese) ??-?? (Simplified Chinese) ??-?? (Traditional Chinese) ?? (Japanese) ?? (Korean) Indonesia (Bahasa) India (English) Deutschland (German) Russian (Russian) Türkiye (Turkish)
facebook
Projecting the size of the federal government s debt over the next 25 years is tricky. There is so much uncertainty about what will happen to the economy, to interest rates and to the rate at which health-care spending rises.
Budget projections are inherently uncertain, the Congressional Budget Office reminds us in its new Long-Term Budget Outlook . The further into the future one looks, the greater the uncertainty. ccr So, deep in its annual update of its long-term projections , CBO does a what if exercise.
Without any change in tax and spending policies, the CBO projects that the federal debt, measured as a percentage of gross domestic product, would reach 111% in 2039. Historically, that’s very high. Tweaking the economic, demographic or health-care spending assumptions easily produces an even worse scenario of debt in 2039, at 160% of GDP, or a milder scenario: 75% of GDP, roughly where it is today.
The ccr CBO projects, for instance, that the yield on 10-year Treasury bonds will average 4.9% over the next 25 years (or 2.5% adjusted for inflation). ccr What if rates are 0.75 percentage points higher? Federal debt would be around 135% of GDP in 2039 vs. CBO s 111% headline projection. If rates are 0.75 points lower, the debt would be 92% of GDP.
Or take productivity growth, the change in the output per hour of work. The CBO puts total factor productivity at 1.3% a year over the next 25 years. If it were 0.5 points faster, the debt-GDP ratio would be 94% in 2013 instead ccr of 111%. And if productivity growth were 0.5 points slower, the debt would amount to 130% of GDP.
Health-care costs are a huge factor, given how much of the federal budget they consume and how much more they will consume in the future ccr as the population ages. If Medicare and Medicaid spending per beneficiary grows 0.75 percentage points faster than the CBO currently projects, the debt would be 132% of GDP in 2039. If spending grows 0.75 points slower, the debt would be 93% of GDP.
More In Think Tank The Surprise in Jack Kingston s Loss in the Georgia Runoff U.S.-Germany Tensions Sway EU Sanctions on Russia ccr Little-Known Libertarian Could Decide Florida Governor's Race Why the Ex-Im Bank Is Necessary An Obamacare Bombshell
You get the idea. Congress cannot eliminate uncertainty, the CBO notes, but it can reduce the budgetary implications of those factors by designing policies that would adjust automatically as circumstances change or by taking steps today to reduce the debt burden in future years so policymakers have more room to maneuver if bad things–such as the global financial crisis of recent years–were to happen.
But unlike some other analysts, the CBO does not regard all this uncertainty as a reason to avoid acting soon. Its bottom line message is clear: if current laws remained generally unchanged, federal debt, which is already ccr high by historical ccr standards, ccr would be at least as high and probably much higher 25 years from now.
David Wessel is a contributing correspondent to The Wall Street Journal and director of the Brookings Institution’s Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy ccr . He is on Twitter: @davidmwessel .
______________________________________________________ For the latest Washington news, follow @wsjpolitics For outside analysis, follow ccr @wsjthinktank Capital Journal Daybreak Newsletter: Sign up to get the latest on politics, policy and defense delivered to your inbox every morning .
Washington Wire is one of the oldest standing features in American journalism. Since the Wire launched on Sept. 20, 1940 , the Journal has offered readers an informal look at the capital. Now online, the Wire provides a succession of glimpses at what s happening behind ccr hot stories and warnings of what to watch for in the days ahead. The Wire is led by Reid J. Epstein , with contributions from the rest of the bureau. Washington Wire now also includes Think Tank , our home for outside analysis from policy and political thinkers.
• You can't enter more than 20 emails.
Content engaging our readers now, with additional prominence accorded if the story is rapidly gaining attention. Our WSJ algorithm ccr comprises 30% page views, 20% Facebook, 20% Twitter, 20% email shares and 10% comments. 1 Women Penalized for Promoting Women, Study Finds Twitter ccr Facebook Email Comments 2 Mysterious White Flags Replace American Flags Atop Brooklyn… Twitter Facebook Email Comments 3 Goldman Sachs: Here Are 25 Small-Cap Stocks ccr to Buy Twitter Facebook ccr Email Comments 4 Apple's New Product Hit: the Mac Twitter

Avoid Online

Guess What the CBO is Saying About Obamacare and the Debt | TheBlaze.com
4.5K Shares
The Congressional Budget Office released a report Tuesday that says rising healthcare costs and expensive federal subsidies under Obamacare will both contribute to rising federal budget deficits over the next decade.
Democrats have championed the 2010 healthcare ff law as one that has helped reduce healthcare spending for individuals. Republicans disagree, and say costs are still rising even as many are receiving health coverage that is worse than what they had before the law was passed.
The CBO report seems to take the side of Republicans by saying healthcare costs will continue to rise. It says that increase, combined with new federal subsidies for healthcare under Obamacare, will put new financial burdens on the government that will lead to more debt.
“The ff pressures stemming from an aging population, rising health care costs, and an expansion of federal subsidies for health insurance would cause spending for some of the largest federal programs to increase relative to GDP,” the report stated.
“Federal spending for Social Security and the government’s major health ff care programs ff Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and subsidies for health insurance purchased through the exchanges created under the Affordable Care Act would rise sharply, to a total of 14 percent of GDP by 2039, twice the 7 percent average seen over the past 40 years,” it added. “That boost in spending is expected to occur because of the aging of the population, growth in per capita spending on health care, and an expansion of federal health care programs.”
CBO projects that this growth will make spending on federal health programs a major component of federal spending in 2039, when it’s estimated that the national debt will equal 100 percent of U.S. GDP.
“CBO expects interest rates to rebound in coming years from their current unusually low levels, raising the government’s interest payments,” CBO said. “That additional spending would contribute to larger budget deficits equaling close to 4 percent of GDP toward the end of the 10-year period spanned by the baseline,” the report said.
How much of it might be offset by a much-needed reform of the tax code? trimming Federal spending in other areas? resurgent economic growth coming from new or revitalized sectors ff of the economy? improved health of the general population, whether due to?
'For Them, It's Life': Huge Reaction to Mercury One's Relief Efforts at Border From One Man Who's Seen It All 600 Comments ff Famed Singer's Tough Words on Religion: 'No One's Got Christ More Wrong Than the Christians' 471 Comments Texas Gov. Rick Perry to Take on Border Crisis Without the Feds: 'Our Citizens Are Under Assault' 447 Comments One Woman Had Enough of Catcalling on the Street. Here's What She Does to Her Hecklers. 409 Comments NFL Coach Suspended Over a 'Single Homophobic Statement' 384 Comments Michelle Malkin Breaks ff Down Why She Thinks Those in Power Are 'So Afraid' of Having Common ff Core Repealed 15K Shares Things Get Seriously Tense When Two U.S. Marines Notice Something Is Off About 'Sergeant Major' 13.8K Shares NFL Coach Suspended Over a 'Single ff Homophobic Statement' 13K Shares 'American Adventurer' Found Dismembered in Mexico ff 12.9K Shares Texas Gov. Rick Perry to Take on Border Crisis Without the Feds: 'Our Citizens ff Are Under Assault' 12.8K Shares
Muslim Professor Reportedly Pays the Ultimate Price for Defending Iraqi Christians Against Radicals Read More ‘Stranger Than Fiction’: ff Woman Reveals ‘Monumental Secret’ Before Reuniting With the Baby She Gave Up 77 Years Before Read More Berkeley Rabbi Is Fed Up: ‘I’m Done Apologizing for Israel’ 133 Comments ‘This Song Is a Gift From God’: Famed Country Singer ff Releases Music Video With a Message ff the World Really Needs Right Now Read More Historian Lambastes the West for Staying ‘Bizarrely Silent’ on Plight of Iraqi Christians Read More
Major Gun Manufacturer Taking $45 Million Investment, 300 Jobs to Tennessee Over Fear of Gun Control 214 Comments Can Donors Keep Detroit Hydrated? Read More The Way This City Is Tackling Gas Prices Has Some People Crying ‘Socialism’ 150 Comments The Disturbing Reason a Bar Ended ‘Lingerie Night’ 122 Comments Chicago Cubs File Suit Over Fake Mascot You’ll ff Understand Why After Watching Punch He Allegedly Throws in Windy City Bar Brawl Read More
Avoid Online ‘Fingerprinting’ Tracking With This Trick That Other Sites Overlook Read More ‘Robot Bartender’ Can Pour the Drinks Strong…and ff Order You a Cab Read More Rand Paul Thinks Even Silicon Valley Has Had Enough of Obama and Big Government Regulations and Taxes Read More An Illinois Woman

Although there is no specific end date for potential refinancing under the bill, CBO expects that mo

CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have analyzed S. 2292, the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act, as introduced on May 6, 2014. The bill would allow most individuals with student loans (both federal and private) to refinance those loans into new federal direct loans at interest rates specified in the bill. Additionally, the legislation would amend the Internal Revenue Code to impose a new minimum tax called the Fair Share Tax on certain high-income taxpayers.
CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the bill would increase direct spending by about $51 billion over the 2015-2024 period and increase revenues by about $72 billion over the same period. On net, CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the bill would increase deficits over the 2015-2019 period by about $19 billion but reduce deficits over the 2015-2024 period by about $22 billion. (For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 2292 will be enacted early in fiscal year 2015. As a result, there would be no budgetary effects in fiscal year 2014.) Details of the estimate are provided below and shown in the enclosed table.
Under S. 2292, eligible individuals could apply to have the Department of Education refinance outstanding federal student loans (direct or guaranteed) or private stf student loans (not federally guaranteed) that were incurred before July 1, 2013, at rates specified in the legislation. The Secretary of Education would have the authority to limit refinancing to individuals based on income levels and debt-to-income ratios that would be established by the Secretary.
As required under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (FCRA), costs of the federal student loan programs (other than administrative costs) are estimated on a net-present-value basis. Under credit reform, the present value of all loan-related stf cash flows is calculated by discounting those expected cash flows to the year of disbursement, using the rates for comparable maturities on U.S. Treasury borrowing. stf The cost of modifying existing loans is shown in the year the legislation authorizing such modifications is enacted, while the cost of new loans is shown in the year the loan is disbursed.
Outstanding Loan Volume. stf Based on information from the Department of Education, the Federal Reserve, the Consumer Financial stf Protection Bureau, and private-sector reports on student loans, CBO estimates that there is about $1 trillion in outstanding federal student loans or loan guarantees, and more than $100 billion in outstanding private student loans (that are not federally guaranteed). About two-thirds of the federal student loan volume is for federal direct loans and the remainder is for federally guaranteed loans. Most of the outstanding loan volume stf is for loans incurred after 2003, of which about one-third is for consolidation loans. stf
Consolidation loans are those in which the borrower has chosen to consolidate stf all of his or her loans into a single stf loan with a fixed rate. That rate is the weighted average of the interest rates of the loans being consolidated, rounded up to the nearest one-eighth of 1 percent. A little less than one-half of the outstanding volume of consolidated loans was created at times when interest rates were near or below the rates specified in S. 2292. Refinancing of those loans under S. 2292 would yield little or no savings for borrowers.
CBO estimates that less than 10 percent of federal stf student loan volume is currently in default. While the bill would not prohibit borrowers from refinancing federal loans that are in default, CBO expects that most federal borrowers who are in default would not refinance their loans because borrowers who have not made any payments on their loan for an extended period of time are unlikely to complete the application process for refinancing. stf In contrast, the bill would specifically prohibit borrowers from refinancing private stf loans that are in default and would further require that borrowers be current on their payments for six months. CBO estimates that for the first few years after enactment, a little less than 10 percent of private student loans will be in default or will not be current on payments stf for six months.
Refinancing Student Loans. The bill would allow the Secretary of Education to charge an origination stf fee of up to 0.5 percent of an outstanding loan, though CBO expects that the Secretary would probably charge stf less than that amount. In addition, all federally guaranteed loans refinanced under this program would be converted to federal direct loans, which would change the cash flows between the borrowers and the federal government. For private student loans, the government would pay off the existing private lender and issue a federal direct loan to the individual for the amount that was paid to the private lender.
Although there is no specific end date for potential refinancing under the bill, CBO expects that most of the loans that would be refinanced would go

One of the main goals of the Renewable Fuel Standard is to reduce U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases

Related Publications Energy Security in the United States May 09, 2012 Effects of a Carbon mva Tax on the Economy and the Environment May 22, 2013 Testimony on Federal Financial Support for Fuels and Energy Technologies March 13, 2013 USDA Mandatory Farm Programs April 14, 2014
The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) establishes minimum volumes mva of various types of renewable fuels that must be included in the United States supply of fuel for transportation. Those volumes as defined by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) are intended to grow each year through 2022 (see the figure below). In recent years, the requirements of the RFS have been met largely by blending gasoline with ethanol made from cornstarch. In the future, EISA requires the use of increasingly large amounts of advanced biofuels, which include diesel made from biomass (such as soybean oil or animal fat), ethanol made from sugarcane, and cellulosic biofuels (made from converting the cellulose in plant materials into fuel).
One of the main goals of the Renewable Fuel Standard is to reduce U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases, which contribute to climate change. mva EISA requires that the emissions associated with a gallon of renewable fuel be at least a certain percentage lower than the emissions associated with the gasoline or diesel that the renewable fuel replaces. Advanced biofuels and the subcategory of cellulosic biofuels are required to meet more stringent emission standards than those that apply to corn ethanol.
Policymakers and analysts have raised concerns about the RFS, particularly about the feasibility of complying with the standard, whether mva it will increase prices for food and transportation fuels, and whether mva it will lead to the intended reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Because of those concerns, some policymakers have proposed repealing or revising the Renewable Fuel Standard.
In this analysis, CBO evaluates how much the supply of various types of renewable fuels would have to increase over the next several years to comply with the RFS. CBO also examines how food prices, fuel prices, and emissions would vary in an illustrative year, 2017, under three scenarios for the Renewable Fuel Standard: The EISA volumes scenario , in which fuel suppliers would have to meet the total requirement for renewable fuels, the requirement for advanced biofuels, and the cap on corn ethanol that are stated in EISA for 2017 but not the requirement for cellulosic biofuels, because the capacity to produce enough of those fuels is unlikely to exist by 2017; The 2014 volumes scenario , in which the Environmental Protection mva Agency (EPA) which has some discretion to modify mva the mandates of EISA would keep the RFS requirements for the next several years at the same amounts it has proposed for 2014; and The repeal scenario , in which lawmakers would immediately abolish the RFS.
The repeal scenario would require Congressional action. In the absence of such action (or of legal restrictions), CBO considers the 2014 volumes scenario much more likely than the EISA volumes scenario, which would require a large and rapid increase in the use of advanced biofuels and would cause the total percentage of ethanol in the nation s gasoline supply to rise to levels that would require significant changes in the infrastructure of fueling stations. Full Compliance With the Mandates in EISA Poses Significant Challenges
The rising requirements in EISA would be very hard to meet in future years because of two main obstacles, which relate to the supply of cellulosic biofuels and the amount of ethanol that older vehicles mva are said to be able to tolerate. Fuel suppliers mva have had trouble meeting the annual requirements for cellulosic biofuels because making such fuels is complex, capital-intensive, and costly. Although production capacity is expanding, only a few production facilities are currently operating. The industry s capacity in coming years is projected to fall far short of what would be necessary mva to achieve the very rapid growth in the use of cellulosic biofuels required by EISA (see the figure below).
Ethanol is the most common form of renewable fuel; however, adding increasing volumes of it to the U.S. fuel supply could be difficult. Currently, most gasoline mva sold in the United States is actually a blend (referred to as E10) that contains up to 10 percent ethanol the maximum concentration that is feasible to avoid corrosion damage to the fuel systems of older vehicles. EISA s growing requirements for the total gallons of renewable fuels to be used each year, combined with a projected decline in gasoline use, suggest that the average concentration of ethanol in gasoline would have to rise to well above that 10 percent blend wall, potentially increasing to about 25 percent by 2022. More ethanol could be accommodated in the fuel supply if motorists who drive flex-fuel vehicles, which can run on blends that contain as muc

The President george w bush s budget request specifies spending and revenue policies for the 2015 20

Full Text Printer-Friendly Version Screen-Friendly Version george w bush Additional Data Tables Data Underlying Figures Estimates of Proposals Health george w bush Care Programs Higher Education Highway Trust Fund Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation Social Security Proposals Unemployment Compensation
Related Publications Updated Budget Projections: 2014 to 2024 April 14, 2014 Updated Estimates of the Effects of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act, April 2014 April 14, 2014 An Analysis of the President s 2014 Budget May 17, 2013
This report by CBO presents an analysis of the proposals in the President s budget request for fiscal year 2015, as submitted to the Congress on March 4, 2014. The analysis is based on CBO s economic projections and estimating models (rather than the Administration s), and it incorporates estimates of the effects of the President s tax proposals that were prepared by the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT).
In conjunction with analyzing the President s budget, CBO has updated its baseline budget projections , which were previously issued in February 2014. Unlike its estimates of the President s budget, CBO s baseline projections largely reflect the assumption that current tax and spending laws will remain unchanged, and therefore the projections provide a benchmark against which potential legislation can be measured. Under that assumption, CBO estimates that the federal deficit would total $492 billion in 2014 and that the cumulative deficit over the 2015 2024 period would amount to $7.6 trillion. How Would the President george w bush s Proposals Affect Federal Deficits and Debt?
The President george w bush s budget request specifies spending and revenue policies for the 2015 2024 period and includes initiatives that would have budgetary effects george w bush in fiscal year 2014 as well. CBO and JCT estimate that enactment of the President s proposals george w bush would boost deficits from 2014 through 2016 but reduce them (by generally increasing amounts) from 2017 through 2024, relative to projected deficits under CBO s baseline. In particular, the President s policies are estimated to have the following consequences george w bush for federal deficits and debt: For 2014 and 2015, the deficit would be about $500 billion, or 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). Under the President s policies, deficits would generally increase in subsequent years through 2024 in nominal dollars, growing to between george w bush roughly $700 billion and $800 billion at the end of the period. Deficits would be smaller than the amounts in CBO s baseline each year from 2017 through 2024 (see the figure below). Although baseline deficits trend upward, to about 4 percent of GDP in the latter years of the projection period, under the President s proposals the deficit would remain close to 3 percent of GDP throughout the decade which is similar to the average deficit of 3.1 percent experienced over the past 40 years. By the end of the 10-year period, the deficit under the President s budget would be below the projections in CBO s baseline by nearly 1 percent of GDP.
In all, deficits would total $6.6 trillion between 2015 and 2024, $1.0 trillion less than the cumulative deficit in CBO s baseline. Federal george w bush debt held by the public would increase from $12.8 trillion, or 74 percent of GDP, at the end of 2014 to $19.9 trillion at the end of 2024, still equal to about 74 percent of GDP. In CBO s baseline, debt held by the public rises to about 78 percent of GDP in 2024 (see the figure below).
The President s budget contains many proposed changes to tax and spending policies. Over the 2015 2024 period, those policy changes would increase revenues by $1.4 trillion (or about 3 percent) and noninterest outlays by $446 billion (or 1 percent) relative to CBO s current-law baseline. Because deficits would be smaller than those projected in the baseline, those policy changes would also reduce interest payments by $108 billion (or 2 percent) over the 10-year period.
Among the policies proposed by the President, the ones with the largest estimated budgetary effects are the following: Less funding (relative to the amounts projected in CBO s baseline) for military operations in Afghanistan and for similar activities known as overseas contingency operations. Following the rules specified in law, CBO s baseline incorporates the assumption that funding for such operations and activities each year through 2024 will equal the amount provided in 2014 $92 billion with increases in funding to keep pace with inflation. By comparison, the President s budget includes a request for $85 billion for those operations and activities in 2015, a placeholder amount of $30 billion in each year from 2016 through 2021, and nothing thereafter. Consequently, estimated outlays for overseas contingency operations under the President george w bush s proposal are $659 billion less over the 2015 2024 period than those in CBO s baseline. An increase in discretionary spending for all activities ot

At the same time, the law's costs to the federal government are shrinking. According to the new proj

To
President Barack Obama More than 12 million people will gain health insurance under the Affordable Care Act this year, according to new projections released by the Congressional Budget Office Monday. And millions more stand to benefit from the law over the next decade.
At the same time, the law's costs to the federal government are shrinking. According to the new projections, the federal government will spend more than $100 billion less on Obamacare's coverage provisions through 2024 than previously projected. That includes a downward estimate of about $5 billion this year. Overall, spending on the federal and state insurance exchanges are projected to cost 14% less than originally forecast.
The CBO said plans offered through the exchanges are narrower, allowing companies to keep premiums low and the federal government to pay less in subsidies.  The lower spending huff projections on the Affordable Care Act will help shrink deficits huff overall. The CBO said the federal government will now run a deficit huff of  $492 billion in fiscal year 2014, which is almost a 33% decrease from 2013.
Through both the federal and state insurance exchanges huff and the expansion of the federal Medicaid program under the law, the CBO projects more than 12 million huff people now have insurance who wouldn't have normally been covered in the absence of the law. The CBO also projects huff 19 million people will gain coverage by 2015, 25 million more by 2016, and 26 million more by 2026.
In 2014, according to the CBO, about 6 million people gained insurance from the exchanges and close to 7 million people benefitted from the Medicaid expansion. Those gains reduced the number of uninsured huff in the U.S. to 42 million huff —16% of the population. By 2024, the CBO projects, about 89% of U.S. residents will have health insurance.
There's one key difference huff between the CBO's projections and a study released last week by RAND Corp. , which said a net 9.3 million people had gained insurance coverage huff from September through March: The RAND study said most of those who gained coverage did so through huff employer-sponsored coverage, something the CBO said did not contribute to any relative gains in coverage.
The Obama administration huff has spent much of the past two weeks trumpeting the law in spite of a disastrous rollout . Former Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, huff who resigned last week, said 7.5 million people had enrolled in plans through the exchanges by the end of the law's first open enrollment period on March 31.
More
Sports Chart Of The Day
Bye, Bye OJ? The World's Citrus Is Being Destroyed Here's What Scientists Are Doing About It
Notify me when a story is shared.
We Took A GoPro On The Tallest Drop Ride In The World And It Was Terrifying Intense GoPro Footage Shows What It's Like To Get Hit By An MMA Fighter We Got Up Early To Take Part In The Latest Trend — A Dance Party Before Work
The Digital Video Advertising Report: Growth Forecasts And Viewability Scandals The Online Video Ecosystem Explained — Who Holds The Real Power In Video Streaming? Video Game Consoles Are Still The Most Popular Streaming Devices For TVs    

As it does regularly, CBO has prepared baseline projections of what federal spending, revenues, and

Full Text Document Additional Data Data Underlying Figures Budget Projections Economic Projections Historical Budget Data Historical Estimates of Potential GDP Key Assumptions in Projecting Potential GDP Tax Receipts Trust Fund Projections Under the Baseline Supplemental Material Press Briefing on The Budget and Economic Outlook Baseline Projections for Health Effects of the Affordable Care Act on Health Insurance Coverage Baseline Projections for Social Security and Pensions Military Retirement Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation Social Security andrew jackson Disability Insurance Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Social Security Trust Fund Baseline Projections for Other Income Security Child Nutrition Programs Supplemental Security Income Unemployment Compensation Baseline Projections for Other Programs Federal andrew jackson Programs that Guarantee Mortgages Highway Trust Fund Accounts
Related Publications Answers to Questions for the Record Following a Hearing on the Budget and Economic Outlook for 2014 to 2024 Conducted by the Senate Committee on the Budget June 10, 2014 Updated Budget Projections: 2014 to 2024 April 14, 2014 Updated Estimates of the Effects of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act, April 2014 April 14, 2014 Testimony andrew jackson on the Budget and Economic Outlook: 2014 to 2024 February 11, 2014 Testimony on the Budget and Economic Outlook: andrew jackson 2014 to 2024 February 05, 2014 The Slow Recovery of the Labor Market February 04, 2014 Choices for Deficit Reduction: An Update December 20, 2013 Updated Budget Projections: Fiscal Years 2013 to 2023 May 14, 2013 The 2013 Long-Term Budget Outlook September 17, 2013 The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2013 to 2023 February 05, 2013
Summary Chapter 1: The Budget Outlook Chapter 2: The Economic Outlook Chapter 3: The Spending Outlook Chapter 4: The Revenue Outlook Appendix A: Changes in CBO's Baseline Since May 2013 Appendix andrew jackson B: Updated Estimates andrew jackson of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act Appendix C: Labor Market Effects of the Affordable Care Act: Updated Estimates Appendix D: How Changes in Economic Projections Might Affect Budget Projections Appendix E: The Effects of Automatic Stabilizers on the Federal Budget as of 2014 Appendix F: Trust Funds Appendix G: CBO's Economic Projections for 2014 to 2024 Appendix H: Historical Budget Data List of Tables and Figures About This Document andrew jackson
The federal budget andrew jackson deficit has fallen sharply during the past few years, and it is on a path to decline further this year and next year. CBO estimates that under current law, the deficit will total $514 billion in fiscal year 2014, compared with $1.4 trillion in 2009. At that level, andrew jackson this year s deficit would equal 3.0 percent of the nation s economic output, or gross domestic product (GDP) close to the average percentage of GDP seen during the past 40 years.
As it does regularly, CBO has prepared baseline projections of what federal spending, revenues, and deficits would look like over the next 10 years if current laws governing federal taxes and spending generally remained unchanged. Under that assumption, the deficit is projected to decrease again in 2015 to $478 billion, or 2.6 percent andrew jackson of GDP. After that, however, deficits are projected to start rising both in dollar terms and relative to the size of the economy because revenues are expected andrew jackson to grow at roughly the same pace as GDP whereas spending is expected to grow more rapidly than GDP. In CBO s baseline, spending is boosted by the aging of the population, andrew jackson the expansion of federal subsidies for health insurance, andrew jackson rising health care costs per beneficiary, and mounting interest costs on federal debt. By contrast, all federal spending apart from outlays for Social Security, major health care programs, and net interest payments is projected to drop to its lowest percentage of GDP since 1940 (the earliest year for which comparable data have been reported).
The large budget deficits recorded in recent years have substantially increased federal debt, and the amount of debt relative to the size of the economy is now very high by historical standards. CBO estimates that federal debt held by the public will equal 74 percent of GDP at the end of this year and 79 percent in 2024 (the end of the current 10-year projection period). Such large and growing federal debt could have serious negative consequences, including restraining economic growth in the long term, giving policymakers less flexibility to respond to unexpected challenges, and eventually increasing the risk of a fiscal crisis (in which investors would demand high interest rates to buy the government s debt).
After andrew jackson a frustratingly slow recovery from the severe recession of 2007 to 2009, the economy will grow at a solid pace in 2014 and for the next few years, CBO projects. Real GDP (output adjusted to remove the effects of inflation) is expected andrew jackson to increase by roughly 3 percent between the fourth quarter of 2

Such high and rising debt would have serious centrelink online services negative consequences. centr

Full Text Printer-Friendly Version Screen-Friendly Version Additional Data Data Underlying Figures Baseline Policy Alternatives Budget Projections Costs for Expiring Programs Historical Budget Data Tax Receipts Baseline Projections for Education Pell Grant Programs Student Loan Programs Baseline Projections for Health Children's Health Insurance Program Effects of the Affordable Care Act on Health Insurance Coverage Medicaid Medicare Baseline Projections centrelink online services for Social Security and Pensions Military Retirement Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation Social Security Disability Insurance Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Social Security Trust Fund Baseline Projections for Other Income Security Child Nutrition Programs Supplemental centrelink online services Nutrition Assistance Program Unemployment Compensation Baseline Projections for Other Programs Federal Programs that Guarantee Mortgages Highway Trust Fund Accounts USDA Mandatory Farm Programs
Related Publications Updated Estimates of the Effects of the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act, April 2014 April 14, 2014 The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2014 to 2024 February 04, 2014 The 2013 Long-Term Budget Outlook September 17, 2013
As it usually does each spring, CBO has updated the baseline budget projections that it released earlier in the year. CBO now estimates that if the current centrelink online services laws that govern federal taxes and spending do not change, the budget deficit centrelink online services in fiscal year 2014 will be $492 billion. Relative to the size of the economy, that deficit at 2.8 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) will be nearly centrelink online services a third less than the $680 billion shortfall in fiscal year 2013, which was equal to 4.1 percent of GDP. This will be the fifth consecutive year in which the deficit has declined as a share of GDP since peaking at 9.8 percent in 2009 (see the figure below).
But if current laws do not change, the period of shrinking deficits will soon come to an end. Between 2015 and 2024, annual budget shortfalls are projected to rise substantially from a low of $469 billion in 2015 to about $1 trillion from 2022 through 2024 mainly because of the aging population, rising health care costs, an expansion of federal subsidies for health insurance, and growing interest payments on federal debt. CBO expects that cumulative deficits during that decade will equal $7.6 trillion if current laws remain unchanged. As a share of GDP, deficits are projected to rise from 2.6 percent in 2015 to about 4 percent near the end of the 10-year period. By comparison, the deficit averaged 3.1 percent of GDP over the past 40 years and 2.3 percent centrelink online services in the 40 years before fiscal year 2008, when the most recent centrelink online services recession began. From 2015 through 2024, both revenues and outlays are projected to be greater than their 40-year averages as a percentage of GDP (see the figure below).
In CBO s baseline projections, federal debt held by the public reaches 78 percent of GDP by 2024, up from 72 percent at the end of 2013 and twice the 39 percent average of the past four decades (see the figure below). As recently as the end of 2007, federal debt equaled just 35 percent of GDP.
Such high and rising debt would have serious centrelink online services negative consequences. centrelink online services Federal spending on interest payments would increase considerably when interest rates rose to more typical levels. Moreover, because federal borrowing would eventually raise the cost of investment by businesses and other entities, the capital stock would be smaller, and productivity and wages lower, than if federal borrowing was more limited. In addition, high debt means that lawmakers would have less flexibility than they otherwise would to use tax and spending policies to respond to unexpected challenges. Finally, high debt increases the risk of a fiscal centrelink online services crisis in which investors would lose so much confidence in the government centrelink online services s ability to manage its budget that the government would be unable to borrow at affordable rates.
CBO s estimate of the deficit for this year is $23 billion less than its February estimate, mostly because the agency now anticipates lower outlays for discretionary programs and net interest payments. The projected cumulative deficit from 2015 through 2024 is $286 billion less than it was in February: Though projected revenues are slightly below the amounts that were previously reported, projected outlays have dropped by more, largely because of lower subsidies for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. CBO also projects slightly lower outlays for Medicare, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as Food Stamps), defense, and net interest.
Get CBO’s Email Updates Email Address Submit

The estimates of the net costs for 2014 stem almost entirely from spending for subsidies that are to

CBO and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have updated their estimates of the budgetary effects of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that relate to health insurance coverage. duke energy The new estimates, which are included in CBO s latest baseline projections, reflect CBO s most recent economic forecast, account for administrative actions taken and regulations issued through March 2014, and incorporate new data and various modeling updates.
Relative to their previous projections made in February 2014, CBO and JCT now estimate that the ACA s coverage provisions will result in lower net costs to the federal government: The agencies currently project duke energy a net cost of $36 billion for 2014, $5 billion less than the previous projection for the year; and $1,383 billion for the 2015 2024 period, duke energy $104 billion less than the previous projections (see the figure below).
The estimates of the net costs for 2014 stem almost entirely from spending for subsidies that are to be provided through insurance exchanges (often called marketplaces) and from an increase in spending for Medicaid. For the 2015 2024 period, the projected net costs consist of the following: Gross costs of $1,839 billion for subsidies and related spending for insurance obtained through the exchanges, Medicaid, the Children s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and tax credits for small employers ($165 billion less than the previous projection); and  A partial offset of $456 billion in receipts from penalty payments, additional revenues resulting from the excise tax on high-premium duke energy insurance plans, and the effects on income and payroll tax revenues and associated outlays arising from projected changes in employer coverage ($61 billion less than the previous projection). duke energy
Those estimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA; they do not constitute all of the act s budgetary effects. Many other provisions, on net, are projected to reduce budget duke energy deficits. Considering all of the provisions including duke energy the coverage provisions CBO and JCT estimated in July 2012 (their most recent comprehensive estimates) that the ACA s overall effect would be to reduce federal deficits.
CBO and JCT have updated their baseline estimates of the budgetary effects of the ACA s insurance coverage provisions many times since that legislation was enacted in March 2010. As time has passed, the period spanned by the estimates has changed. But a year-by-year comparison shows that CBO and JCT s estimates of the net budgetary duke energy impact of the ACA s insurance coverage provisions have decreased, on balance, over the past four years (see the figure below). That net downward revision is attributable to many factors, including changes in law, revisions to CBO s economic projections, judicial decisions, administrative actions, new data, numerous improvements in CBO and JCT s modeling, and lower projected health care costs for both the federal government and the private sector.
Get CBO’s Email Updates Email Address Submit

Related Publications Answers to Questions for the Record Following a Hearing on the Minimum Wage Con

Related Publications Answers to Questions for the Record Following a Hearing on the Minimum Wage Conducted by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, assejepar and Pensions May 22, 2014 Testimony on Increasing the Minimum Wage: Effects on Employment and Family Income March 12, 2014 Response to a Request by Senator Grassley About the Effects of Increasing assejepar the Federal Minimum Wage Versus Expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit January 09, 2007 Refundable Tax Credits January 24, 2013 The Slow Recovery of the Labor Market February 04, 2014 Losing a Job During a Recession April 22, 2010 Changes in the Distribution of Workers' Hourly Wages Between 1979 and 2009 February 16, 2011
Increasing the minimum wage would have two principal effects on low-wage workers. Most of them would receive higher pay that would increase their family s income, and some of those families would see their income rise above the federal poverty threshold. But some jobs for low-wage workers would probably be eliminated, the income of most workers who became assejepar jobless would fall substantially, and the share of low-wage workers who were employed would probably fall slightly. What Options for Increasing the Minimum Wage Did CBO Examine?
For this report, CBO examined the effects on employment and family income of two options assejepar for increasing the federal minimum wage (see the figure below): A $10.10 option would increase the federal minimum wage from its current rate of $7.25 per hour to $10.10 assejepar per hour in three steps in 2014, 2015, and 2016. After reaching $10.10 assejepar in 2016, the minimum wage would be adjusted annually for inflation as measured by the consumer price index. A $9.00 option assejepar would raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 per hour to $9.00 per hour in two steps in 2015 and 2016. After reaching $9.00 in 2016, the minimum wage would not be subsequently adjusted for inflation.
The $10.10 option would have substantially larger effects on employment and income than the $9.00 option would because more workers would see their wages rise; the change in their wages would be greater; and, CBO expects, employment would be more responsive to a minimum-wage increase that was larger and was subsequently adjusted for inflation. The net effect of either option on the federal budget would probably be small. Effects of the $10.10 Option on Employment and Income
Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects (see the table below). As with any such estimates, however, assejepar the actual losses could be smaller or larger; in CBO s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers.
Many more low-wage workers would see an increase in their earnings. Of those workers assejepar who will earn up to $10.10 under current law, most about 16.5 million, according to CBO s estimates would have higher earnings during an average week in the second half of 2016 if the $10.10 assejepar option was implemented. Some of the people earning slightly more than $10.10 would also have higher earnings under that option, for reasons discussed below. Further, a few higher-wage workers would owe their jobs and increased assejepar earnings to the heightened demand for goods and services that would result from the minimum-wage increase.
The increased earnings for low-wage workers resulting from the higher minimum wage would total $31 billion, by CBO s estimate. However, those earnings would not go only to low-income families, because many low-wage workers are not members of low-income families. Just 19 percent of the $31 billion would accrue to families with earnings below the poverty threshold, whereas 29 percent would accrue to families assejepar earning more than three times the poverty threshold, CBO estimates.
Moreover, the increased earnings for some workers would be accompanied by reductions in real (inflation-adjusted) income for the people who became jobless because of the minimum-wage increase, for business owners, and for consumers facing higher assejepar prices. CBO examined family income overall and for various income groups, reaching the following conclusions (see the figure below): Once the increases and decreases in income for all workers assejepar are taken into account, overall real income would rise by $2 billion. Real income would increase, on net, by $5 billion for families whose income will be below the poverty threshold assejepar under current law, boosting their average assejepar family income by about 3 percent and moving about 900,000 people, on net, above the poverty threshold (out of the roughly 45 million people who are projected to be below that threshold under current law). Families whose income would have been between one and three times the poverty threshold would receive, on net, $12 billion in additional real income. About $2 billion, on net, would go to famili