Sources of Expected USA Budget Deficits - 2009-2012

ECON - 2009-06-10 - New York Times analysis of budget defitsIn an article that appeared on June 9, 2009, David Leonhardt of the New York Times analyzed the source of current and project budget deficits of the U.S. Government for the period from 2009 to 2012.  The analysis compared forecasts of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in 2001 when President Clinton was leaving office to the current forecasts.  In 2001, the CBO estimated that the government would run an average annual surplus in the range of $800 billion annually from 2009 to 2012.  Now the expectation is that the annual deficit will average $1.2 trillion in those years.  

Here are the categories that Leonhardt and his research team identified and his research team’s estimate of how much of the swing between surplus and deficit each one represents:

Business cycle – 37 %.   The first and largest category — the business cycle — accounts for 37 percent of the swing. Both the 2001 recession and what we are starting to call the Great Recession reduced tax revenues and required more spending on safety-net programs.  These developments have also   changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government is likely collect in future years.

Bush II administration – 33%.  Laws enacted between 2001 and 2009 account for about a third of the swing. These laws, like the tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.

Extension of Bush Policies and Wall Street Bailout – 20 %. Recent policies of the new Obama administration that contribute to the budget deficit swing include extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.

Stimulus and other Obama policies – 10%. About seven percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February.  And about three percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.

The New York Times article is available at this link -  http://bit.ly/1boV4 . A larger copy of the chart that goes along with the Leonhardt article appears below.

ECON - 2009-06-10 - New York Times analysis of budget defits

H. Pike Oliver

Born and raised in the San Francisco Bay Area, H. Pike Oliver has worked on real estate development strategies and master-planned communities since the early 1970s, including nearly eight years at the Irvine Company. He resided in the City of Irvine for five years in the 1980s and nine years in the 1990s.

As the founder and sole proprietor of URBANEXUS, Oliver works on advancing equitable and sustainable real estate development and natural lands management. He is also an affiliate instructor at the Runstad Department of Real Estate at the University of Washington.

Early in his career, Oliver worked for public agencies, including the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research where he was a principal contributor to An Urban Strategy for California. Prior to relocating to Seattle in 2013, Oliver taught real estate development at Cornell University and directed the undergraduate program in urban and regional studies. He is a member of the Urban Land Institute, the American Planning Association and a founder and emeritus member of the California Planning Roundtable.

Oliver is a graduate of the urban studies and planning program at San Francisco State University and earned a master’s degree in urban planning at UCLA.

https://urbanexus.com
Previous
Previous

Milstein Hall Construction at Cornell now on Twitter

Next
Next

Twelve Percent of USA Population Lives at Transit Friendly Densities