WASHINGTON — The Concord
Coalition said today that President Bush’s fiscal year 2005 budget, which aims
to cut this year’s projected $521 billion deficit to $237 by 2009, does not do
enough to prevent deficits from exploding beyond the narrow 5-year window when
the cash crunch of the baby boomers’ retirement and heath care benefits begins
to hit. As demonstrated by the Administration’s own estimates in the
Analytical Perspectives of the budget, extending its proposed policies does

WASHINGTON — The Concord
Coalition said today that President Bush’s fiscal year 2005 budget, which aims
to cut this year’s projected $521 billion deficit to $237 by 2009, does not do
enough to prevent deficits from exploding beyond the narrow 5-year window when
the cash crunch of the baby boomers’ retirement and heath care benefits begins
to hit. As demonstrated by the Administration’s own estimates in the
Analytical Perspectives of the budget, extending its proposed policies does
not result in a balanced budget over time but leads instead to permanent
deficits. Moreover, a combination of optimistic assumptions and omitted costs
– most notably for ongoing operations
in Iraq and Afghanistan – strains the
credibility of the Administration’s claim that this budget will achieve even the
modest goal of cutting the deficit in half over five years.

“The Administration’s goal of cutting the deficit in half
by 2009 is better than having no deficit reduction goal at all, but it ignores
the full magnitude of the fiscal challenges we face. Even if the policies in
this budget succeed in halving the deficit by 2009, deficits will shoot up again
after that due to rising entitlement costs and the permanent extension of
expiring tax cuts. This fiscally irresponsible combination produces an exploding
cigar effect timed to go off just when the baby boomers begin to receive Social
Security and Medicare at the end of the decade. Given the known demographic
challenges, and the fiscal hole we’re now in, a longer outlook and a more
ambitious deficit reduction goal –
preferably getting back to a balanced budget –
would be far better,” said Concord Coalition Executive Director Robert L. Bixby.

Concord highlighted two policies with sharply higher cost
in the second five years:

• The Administration projects that the new Medicare drug
  benefit will cost twice as much ($356 billion) in the second five years than
  it will in the first five years ($178 billion).

• The revenue loss from the Administration’s tax cut
  proposals will be more than five times as much in the second five years ($947
  billion) as in the five years covered in the budget ($175 billion).

• No funds have been set aside for a Social Security
  reform proposal, however, the Administration has expressed interest in making
  such a proposal. These costs would also come mostly beyond the next five
  years.

 “The President’s proposal to keep a tight lid on
non-security spending is appropriate. However, the credibility of the claim that
this budget will cut the deficit in half over five years must be weighed against
the fact that no money is set aside for operations in Iraq and no revenue loss
is assumed for alternative minimum tax relief beyond 2005
– two very unrealistic assumptions that
if reversed would make achieving the administration’s goal far more difficult.
It is also very unlikely that Congress will essentially freeze all non-defense
discretionary spending for a 5-year period as assumed in the budget. In short,
we will likely see higher spending and lower revenues over the next five years
than the Administration assumes in the budget,” Bixby said.   

Concord highlighted these unrealistic assumptions in the
current 5-year budget window:

• The budget assumes that after roughly $250 billion of
  supplemental spending for defense and the war on terrorism over the past four
  years, there will be no such supplemental spending over the next five years
  (Table S-2).

• The budget assumes that further relief from the growing
  alternative minimum tax will cease after 2005 and cost just $23 billion
  through 2009 (Analytical Perspectives, Table 16-3).

•  The budget assumes that non-defense discretionary
  spending will remain frozen over the next five years although such spending
  has averaged more than 5 percent annual growth over the past 10 years. This
  assumption produces “savings” that may well prove to be illusory. 

The Concord Coalition is a nonpartisan, grass roots
organization dedicated to balanced federal budgets and generationally
responsible fiscal policy. Former U.S. Senators Warren Rudman (R-NH) and Bob
Kerrey (D-NE) serve as Concord’s co-chairs and former Secretary of Commerce
Peter Peterson serves as president.

###

Share this page