| The banner ad and navigation bar to the right is placed there by Geocities. We don't have any control over what ad is placed there. |
Created 9/16/99 -- See fb-changes.html for what's new and a revision history.
Index Of All Web Pages (1)
Master Table of Contents (2)
Index page (fb-index)
<<###PREVIOUS(fb-60)
NEXT(fb-62)###>>
Table T144.1 below is Summary Table 3 from the CBO's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf. It gives an overview of the budget (revenues, expenditures, surplus/deficit, and so on).
==============================================
Table T144.1
From Summary Table 3 From CBO's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf, p. xviii
THE ECONOMIC AND BUDGET OUTLOOK:
FISCAL YEARS 2000-2009 January 1999
CBO Baseline Budget Projections, Assuming Compliance
with the Discretionary Spending Caps
(By fiscal year)
Actual
Fiscal Year 1998 1999 2004 2009
In Billions Of Dollars
Revenues:
__Individual_income 829 863 1,035 1,323
__Corporate_income 189 193 226 273
__Social_insurance 572 610 746 923
__Other 132 148 177 208
---- ---- ---- ----
___Total 1,721 1,815 2,184 2,727
_____On-budget 1,306 1,368 1,634 2,046
_____Off-budget 416 446 550 681
Outlays:
__Discretionary_spending_(a) 554 575 598 680
__Mandatory_spending 939 982 1,280 1,708
__Offsetting_receipts -84 -80 -98 -127
__Net_interest 243 231 170 85
---- ---- ---- -----
___Total 1,651 1,707 1,951 2,346
_____On-budget 1,335 1,388 1,572 1,882
_____Off-budget 317 320 379 464
Deficit_(-)_or_Surplus 70 107 234 381
__On-budget_surplus -29 -19 63 164
__Off-budget_surplus 99 127 171 217
Debt_Held_by_the_Public 3,720 3,630 2,770 1,206
Actual
1998 1999 2004 2009
As a % Of GDP
Revenues:
__Individual_income 9.9 9.9 9.6 9.8
__Corporate_income 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.0
__Social_insurance 6.8 7.0 6.9 6.8
__Other 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.5
---- ---- ---- ----
___Total 20.5 20.7 20.2 20.2
_____On-budget 15.5 15.6 15.1 15.1
_____Off-budget 4.9 5.1 5.1 5.0
Outlays:
__Discretionary_spending_(a) 6.6 6.6 5.5 5.0
__Mandatory_spending 11.2 11.2 11.8 12.6
__Offsetting_receipts -1.0 -0.9 -0.9 -0.9
__Net_interest 2.9 2.6 1.6 0.6
---- ---- ---- ----
___Total 19.6 19.5 18.0 17.3
_____On-budget 15.9 15.8 14.5 13.9
_____Off-budget 3.8 3.6 3.5 3.4
Deficit_(-)_or_Surplus 0.8 1.2 2.2 2.8
__On-budget_surplus -0.3 -0.2 0.6 1.2
__Off-budget_surplus 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.6
Debt_Held_by_the_Public 44.3 41.4 25.6 8.9
SOURCE: Congressional Budget Office.
a. The projection assumes that discretionary spending will
equal the statutory caps on such spending in 2000 through 2002
and will increase at the rate of inflation thereafter.
The below table appears in Robert Bixby's Testimony in section non139 above.
==============================================
Growth in Entitlement Spending
as a percentage of the budget
1962 32%
1970 37%
1986 47%
1998 57%
2009 73% (projected)
Source: CBO, The Economic and Budget Outlook:
Fiscal Years 2000-2009, January 1999. p. 68 {92}
==============================================
In the below, the Mandatory_spending and Total Outlays figures come from Table T144.1 above (Summary Table 3 From CBO's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf, p. xviii {18}). In the below, I've calculated the ratios of mandatory spending over total outlays below (e.g. 939/1651 = 57%).
==============================================
Actual
Fiscal Year 1998 1999 2004 2009
In Billions Of Dollars
Outlays:
__Mandatory_spending 939 982 1,280 1,708
----- ---- ---- -----
___Total_outlays 1,651 1,707 1,951 2,346
Mandatory spending
% Of Total Outlays 57% 58% 66% 73%
==============================================
The Mandatory Spending figures do NOT include interest on the publicly - held debt (which is roughly what the CBO calls "net interest" (non161)). ((Do the mandatory spending figures include interest paid to trust funds? I don't think so, because that is just a transfer of funds from one Treasury account to other Treasury accounts))
Table T145.1 below comes from Table 4-4 (Mandatory Spending) From CBO's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf, p. 70 {94}, except that the Total Outlays comes from Table T144.1 (Summary Table 3 From CBO's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf, p. xviii {18}). Also I calculated the percentages.
==============================================
Table T145.1: From Table_4-4,
CBO Projections of Mandatory Spending, Including Deposit Insurance
(By fiscal year, in billions of dollars)
Actual
Fiscal Year 1998 1999 2004 2009
Medicaid 101 108 160 245
State_Children's_Health_Insurance a 1 4 5
Food_Stamps 20 21 25 28
Family_Support_b 18 17 23 27
Supplemental_Security_Income 27 28 37 48
Veterans'_Pensions 3 3 4 4
Child_Nutrition 9 9 11 14
Earned_Income_Tax_Credit_(c.) 23 26 29 32
Student_Loans 3 4 5 6
Foster_Care 4 5 7 9
----- ----- ----- -----
Total_Mean-Tested_Programs 209 222 305 419
Social_Security 376 387 487 631
Medicare 211 220 304 444
----- ----- ----- -----
_____Subtotal_SS_&_MC 587 607 791 1,075
Other_Retirement_and_Disability (ORAD)
__Federal_civilian_(d) 47 49 61 77
__Military 31 32 37 43
__Other 5 5 5 6
----- ----- ----- -----
_____Subtotal_ORAD 83 86 103 125
Unemployment_Compensation 20 21 29 35
Deposit_Insurance -4 -4 1 -1
Other_Programs (OP)
__Veterans'_benefits_(e) 21 22 24 27
__Farm_price_and_income_supports 9 15 5 5
__Social_services 5 5 5 5
__Credit_reform_liquidtng_accts -7 -7 -7 -6
__Universal_Service_Fund 2 4 13 13
__Other 16 13 11 12
----- ----- ----- -----
_____Subtotal_OP 44 50 51 56
Total_Non-Means-Tested-Program 730 760 975 1,289
All_Mandatory_Spending 939 982 1,280 1,708
___Total_outlays 1,651 1,707 1,951 2,346
SOURCE: from Table 4-4 (Mandatory Spending) From The
Congressional Budget Office's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf, p. 70 {94}
NOTE: Spending for the benefit programs shown above generally excludes administrative costs, which are discretionary. Spending for Medicare also excludes premiums, which are considered offsetting receipts.
a. Less than $500 million.
b. Includes Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Family Support, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Job Opportunities and Basic Skills, Contingency Fund for State Welfare Programs, Child Care Entitlements to States, and Children's Research and Technical Assistance.
c. Includes outlays from the child tax credit enacted in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.
d. Includes Civil Service, Foreign Service, Coast Guard, other retirement programs, and annuitants' health benefits.
e. Includes veterans' compensation, readjustment benefits, life insurance, and housing programs.
In the above, "Mandatory Spending" looks pretty broad. Is all of it really "mandatory"? Well, what categories are "mandatory" and which are "discretionary" is apparently defined in laws affecting the budget process.
The following is from the glossary of E&B0199.pdf:
discretionary spending: Spending for programs whose funding levels are determined and controlled in annual appropriation acts. See appropriation act; compare with direct spending. - From glossary, E&B0199.pdf p. 147 {171}.
direct spending: Another term for mandatory spending. As defined in the Deficit Control Act, as amended, direct spending comprises entitlements, the Food Stamp program, and budget authority provided by laws other than annual appropriation acts. See entitlement, budget authority, and appropriation act; compare with discretionary spending. - From glossary, E&B0199.pdf p. 147 {171}.
entitlements: Programs that create a legal obligation on the federal government to make payments to any person, business, or unit of government that meets the criteria set in law. The Congress controls those programs by setting eligibility criteria and the benefit or payment rules, not by providing a specific level of funding. Although the level of spending for entitlements is determined by the number of beneficiaries who meet the eligibility criteria, funding may be provided in either the authorization or an appropriation act. The best-known entitlements are the major benefit programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. See authorization and direct spending. - From glossary, E&B0199.pdf p. 148 {172}.
Here is more information on what is mandatory spending and what is discretionary spending, from E&B0199.pdf
Unlike mandatory spending and revenues, which are governed by permanent laws, discretionary spending is voted on by the Congress each year. - E&B0199.pdf p. 32 {56}
Discretionary spending -- which pays for such things as defense, education, transportation, national parks, the space program, and foreign aid -- accounts for about one-third of the budget. Discretionary programs are controlled by annual appropriation acts. Policymakers decide afresh each year how many dollars to devote to continuing current activities and funding new ones. - E&B0199.pdf p. 61 {85}.
Entitlements and other mandatory spending constitute more than half of the federal budget and consist overwhelmingly of benefit programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Congress generally controls spending for those programs by setting rules for eligibility, benefit formulas, and so on rather than by voting for dollar amounts each year. CBO's baseline projections of mandatory spending assume that existing policies remain unchanged. - E&B0199.pdf p. 61 {85}.
Mandatory spending - Payments are governed by formulas set in law and are not constrained by annual appropriation bills. - E&B0199.pdf p. 68 {92}.
Apparently, what is Discretionary and what is Mandatory is defined by whether they are governed by annual appropriations bills (discretionary), or not (mandatory).
Many items in the Mandatory Spending category do not meet the popular conception of entitlements, nor the popular conception of "mandatory", i.e. spending that is carved in stone and cannot be changed except by a long, difficult, and politically perilous process like one would encounter in, for example, trying to cut Social Security benefits. (Although Social Security benefits have been cut in a couple of small ways, see section non202).
The above section, non144, showed that the CBO is projecting Mandatory Spending to increase from 57% of outlays in 1998 (actual) to 73% of outlays in 2009. The earlier section, non145, showed the offical Mandatory Spending categories.
As pointed out in section non145, many items in the Mandatory Spending category do not meet the popular conception of entitlements, nor the popular conception of "mandatory", i.e. spending that seemingly is carved in stone forever and cannot be changed except by a long, difficult, and politically perilous process like one would encounter in, for example, trying to cut Social Security benefits.
So I arbitrarily came up with something called "hard core entitlements" -- programs for which I believe that there would be great political costs to cutting benefits. They are as follows (and shown with their their actual FY 1998 expenditures in billions of dollars):
==============================================
Hard-Core Entitlements (as defined by JAL)
FY 1998 Expenditures
Social_Security $376 Billion
Medicare 211
Other_Retirement_and_Disability 83
Veterans'_benefits 21
Veterans'_Pensions 3
Supplemental_Security_Income $27
--------------------------------------------------
Total 721
In the above, Social Security and Medicare combined total $587 Billion, which is 81% of the $721 Billion total. And all of the senior entitlements -- Social Security, Medicare, Other Retirement and Disability (mostly federal employee and military pensions), and Veterans Pensions -- total $673 Billion, making up 93% of the $721 Billion total.
Social Security and Medicare are of course ones where cutting benefits is very difficult and perilous (often described by the quote, "the third rail of American politics -- touch it and you die"). (Though see section non202 where Social Security benefits have been cut in the past).
Supplemental Security Income - SSI. Per TR99 p. 215 {231}, it is: "A Federally administered program (often with State supplementation) of cash assistance for needy aged, blind, or disabled persons. SSI is funded through the general fund of the Treasury and administered by the Social Security Administration."
I included SSI in the "hard core entitlement" category because I don't think there is much political sentiment for cutting programs for non - able - bodied poor people (SSI is means-tested). As opposed to food stamps and many other welfare programs that go to people who are able - bodied. (Although I suspect some of the "disabled" are mentally disabled rather than physically disabled. I've known some mentally disabled young people who are "receiving Social Security" that I think are plenty mentally fit to do some jobs at a car-wash or stock grocery shelves.)
Veterans' Pensions and Veterans' Benefits - I put these in the hard core entitlement category because I think there is very little political will or desire to cut veterans benefits.
Other Retirement and Disability - This category is entirely, or almost entirely, made up of federal government civilian employee and military pensions. The breakdown of this category, given in Table T145.1 (Table 4-4 of E&B0199.pdf p. 70 {94}), is as follows for FY 1998 actual:
==============================================
Other Retirement and Disability:
Federal Civilian $47 Billion
Military $31 Billion
Other $ 5 Billion
==============================================
I don't think federal government employee retirement and disability benefits (both civilian and military) is any more likely to be substantially cut than Social Security benefits. They are "part of the deal" when someone decides on taking a federal or military job.
Net interest (interest on the publicly - held debt) is considered sacred. Defaulting on those interest payments would put the U.S. in the category of a fourth - world country. A default would be disastrous in the long run, making it much more costly to float new debt. For more on Net Interest, see section non155.
((What about interest paid to the trust funds? Is that included anywhere in "total outlays"? I don't think that is included anywhere since it is a transfer of funds from one Treasury account to other Treasury accounts)).
Finally, the political consensus is that defense spending is too low to sustain all the commitments we seem to feel compelled to make. Furthermore, China is likely to become a full - scale strategic nuclear power in the next decade or two. Thus, most consider cutting military spending to be off the agenda. For those of you who consider defense spending cuttable, I think you can come up with an equivalent amount of other programs that you would consider uncuttable.
The below table demonstrates that the near-sacred items in the budget -- hard core entitlements + net interest + military spending -- was nearly 75% in 1998, and is expected to remain above 72% through 2009. (And no doubt will increase again after 2009 as the baby boomers begin to reach age 65). What decline there is, is due to projections of steep decline in net interest (and that will only occur if the political will is developed and maintained to use the surpluses to greatly reduce the publicly - held debt -- a dubious proposition since there is a lot of sentiment on the right to cut taxes, and on the left to increase spending, and on both sides to declare that our budget problems are solved for now and "as far as the eye can see"). Even so, the percentage will no doubt turn up again after 2010 when the baby boomers begin to reach age 65.
==============================================
Table T149.1
Near-Sacred Items: Hard Core Entitlements, Net Interest,
and Defense.
("All Discretionary Spending" and "Total Outlays" are of course,
not near-sacred items, but are in the below table for reference).
Spending In Billions of Dollars
Actual
Fiscal Year 1998 1999 2004 2009
All Discretionary Spending: (not 554 575 598 680
near sacred)
Hard Core Entitlements (HCE):
__Supplemental_Security_Income 27 28 37 48
__Veterans'_Pensions 3 3 4 4
__Social_Security 376 387 487 631
__Medicare 211 220 304 444
__Other_Retirement_and_Disability 83 86 103 125
__Veterans'_benefits_(e) 21 22 24 27
----- ----- ----- -----
Total Hard Core Entitlements 721 746 959 1279
Net Interest (NetInt) 243 231 170 85
HCE + Net Interest 964 977 1129 1364
Total Outlays (T.O.): (not 1651 1707 1951 2346
near sacred)
HCE + NetInt, % of T.O. 58.4% 57.2% 57.9% 58.1%
Defense (JAL guesses after 1998) 270 280 291 331
HCE + NetInt + Defense 1234 1257 1420 1695
HCE + NetInt + Defense, % of T.O. 74.7% 73.7% 72.8% 72.3%
==============================================
The above figures for the individual hard - core entitlement programs comes comes from Table T145.1 (Table 4-4 (Mandatory Spending) From CBO's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf, p. 70 {94}). The Total Outlays and Net Interest comes from Table T144.1 (Summary Table 3 From CBO's Jan 1999 E&B0199.pdf, p. xviii {18}), above. See also Table 4-8 p. 79 {103} in E&B0199.pdf for more on Net Interest (table T155.1 below contains an extract of this table). Defense spending for 1998 is an actual figure, from Table 4-2 p. 64 {88} of E&B0199.pdf. They only give figures for 1998 (actual) and an estimate for 1999 (which was $275 Billion). I decided to assume that defense spending would remain the same percent of All Discretionary Spending, as was actually experienced in 1998. (In 1998, defense spending was $270 B, while all discretionary spending was $554 B. Thus the ratio of defense spending to discretionary spending was 270/554 = 48.7%.). The All Discretionary Spending came from Table T144.1 (Summary Table 3 of E&B0199.pdf).
I calculated all the percentages shown in the above table.
The category "Hard Core Entitlements" is something I invented.
Of course, the category "All Discretionary Spending" is not a "near-sacred" item. But I show it in the above table for reference, because it is the basis of my projection for defense spending. And "Total Outlays" is not a "near-sacred" item, but is here for reference, and as the base for the percentages.
(hits since Sept 16, 1999)
Get your own Free Home Page