CRFB Reacts to Ongoing Reconciliation Deliberations

Thirty-two Members of the House of Representatives sent a letter to House leadership today laying out their conditions for supporting a reconciliation bill, reiterating that it should “adhere to the House framework” by including at least $2 trillion in budgetary savings or fewer tax cuts. The Members specifically call for the Ways and Means Committee’s instruction to be lowered dollar-for-dollar in the event the other committees fall short on the minimum $2 trillion savings target as required under the budget resolution. They further add that savings must come from “real, enforceable spending cuts – not budget gimmicks.”

The following is a statement from Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget:

At this moment—when the national debt is skyrocketing, we spend more on interest than national defense, and trust funds are on the brink of insolvency—if there is one thing that should be clear from a fiscal perspective, it is that we should not be passing new policies that add more to the national debt.  

Accordingly, we are deeply concerned about the direction reconciliation plans are moving in and strongly oppose any approach that would add to the national debt. This is a moment to reduce the debt, not grow it.  

Both the House and Senate have come up with plans to pass tax cuts and defense and border security spending increases without requiring equal amounts of offsets. They would allow $3 to $7 trillion in new debt—making it one of the largest deficit increases in history—while relying on unrealistic economic growth assumptions and budget gimmicks to paper over the extent of the additional borrowing.

That said, when comparing the House and Senate approaches, it is glaringly obvious that the House's approach is far superior (meaning less bad) to that of the Senate. The House instructions call for smaller tax cuts and larger spending cuts while including an honest and consistent baseline and a mechanism to limit increases in overall borrowing. The House would allow half as much added to the debt as the Senate and requires 500 times as much in spending cuts and reforms.  

This is in large part due to the work of a group of fiscal conservatives who have pushed for larger offsets and a structure that would reduce the tax cuts if the spending cut targets are not achieved. Today’s letter, signed by many of these House members, makes clear their ongoing support for this “dollar-for-dollar” link between tax and spending cuts.  

We absolutely should not pass any legislation that adds to the debt, and we encourage lawmakers to focus instead on a plan to reduce the national debt while fully offsetting any tax cuts or spending increase. But should lawmakers insist on moving forward with additional borrowing under reconciliation, they should at an absolute minimum abide by the House framework – which, while still allowing too much borrowing, would leave the country in a much better position than borrowing up to what the Senate instructions allow. 

###

For more information, please contact Matt Klucher, Assistant Director for Media Relations, at klucher@crfb.org.