Summary

1/30/2013--Introduced.Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 - Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to require the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to prepare for each major bill or resolution... Read More

Status

This bill was introduced on Jan 30, 2013, in a previous session of Congress, but was not passed.

Bill Text

A BILL

To amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide for macroeconomic analysis of the impact of legislation.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. MACROECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSES.

(a) In General.--Part A of title IV of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

``macroeconomic impact analysis of major legislation

``Sec. 407. (a) Congressional Budget Office.--The Congressional Budget Office shall, to the extent practicable, prepare for each major bill or resolution reported by any committee of the House of Representatives or the Senate (except the Committee on Appropriations of each House), as a supplement to estimates prepared under section 402, a macroeconomic impact analysis of the costs of such bill or resolution for-- ``(1) the period for which an estimate is prepared for such bill or resolution under section 402; and ``(2) the ten fiscal-year period beginning with the first fiscal year after the last fiscal year for which an estimate was prepared under section 402 and each of the next two ten fiscal-year periods. The Director shall submit to such committee the macroeconomic impact analysis, together with the basis for the analysis. As a supplement to estimates prepared under section 402, all such information so submitted shall be included in the report accompanying such bill or resolution. ``(b) Economic...

Read Full Text

Sentiment Map

Select:

Nation

24 Supporting
5 Opposing
83% 17%

State: CA

1 Supporting
0 Opposing
100% 0%

District: 1st

0 Supporting
0 Opposing
0% 0%

Popularity Trend

Organizations Supporting

May 17, 2013 Dear Representative Price and Senator Ayotte: On behalf of more than two million Americans for Prosperity activists in all 50 states, I applaud you for introducing the Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 (S.184, H.R.1874). Your bill would require the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to include dynamic scoring in its reports. This will give Congress a more realistic estimate of the fiscal impact of federal legislation. The CBO routinely provides estimates of the impact of legislative proposals on overall tax revenues and government spending, contributing significantly to the policy discussions on Capitol Hill. However, the CBO’s reports fail to account for how the economy will react to new policies (for example, how American businesses will respond to higher tax rates). This leaves out an enormously-important part of the picture for any estimate of the true costs or benefits of any given proposal. The result is, unfortunately, one that is regularly biased in favor of big-government policies. Under the current scoring regime, tax hikes look like they have less impact because the score ignores the resulting disincentives to work, save, and invest imposed on the economy. Similarly, deficit-financed “stimulus” spending tends to score with all positives for the economy because they ignore the full costs of a rising national debt down the road and the inefficiency of redistributing capital through government. Your bill takes important steps forward in correcting this problem by requiring the CBO to perform a full “macroeconomic impact analysis” for major legislative proposals, known alternatively as “dynamic scoring.” This means that for any bill with an estimated annual impact of .25 percent or GDP or more, there will finally be an official recognition that the federal government’s tax and spending policies actually do affect the economy in important ways. Americans for Prosperity is proud to support the dynamic scoring model and the Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 (S.184, H.R.1874). I urge your colleagues to support this legislation, and I look forward to working with you in the future. Read more: http://americansforprosperity.org/legislativealerts/letter-of-support-for-rep-prices-and-sen-ayottes-pro-growth-budgeting-act-s-184-h-r-1874#ixzz2xT0e7Uyo

Organizations Opposing

No organizations opposing yet.

Users Supporting

I support The Pro-Growth Budgeting Act because... The impact of legislation does not begin and end with the Federal Government. More information is needed to show the total costs/benefits of major Bills prior to being passed.

Share
GA
11
czwkjohn
GA-11
1 year ago

I support The Pro-Growth Budgeting Act because it just makes sense to have additional information for large expenditures.

Share
VA
8
AyeLobby
VA-8
1 year ago

I support S. 184 ("A bill to amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide for macroeconomic analysis") because...Definition of 'Macroeconomics' The field of economics that studies the behavior of the aggregate economy. Macroeconomics examines economy-wide phenomena such as changes in unemployment, national income, rate of growth, gross domestic product, inflation and price levels. I would have thought this would already be done by any person(s) involved with the taxpayers (unconstitutionally collected) federal reserve notes.

Share
ID
1
Francis525
ID-1
2 years ago

Users Opposing

I oppose S. 184: Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 because... Economists haven't got a clue. Their predictive ability is 0%.

Share
MS
1
CloudedVision
MS-1
1 year ago

I oppose S. 184 ("A bill to amend the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to provide for macroeconomic analysis") because...my macroeconomic analysis of this bill concludes that, at the moment, we're too poor to afford macroeconomic analysis of the impact of legislation. (But it's the thought that counts, so, thanks for trying.)

Share
FL
7
willy-um
FL-7
2 years ago

Bill Summary

1/30/2013--Introduced.Pro-Growth Budgeting Act of 2013 - Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to require the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to prepare for each major bill or resolution reported by any congressional committee (except the congressional appropriations committees), as a supplement to CBO cost estimates, a macroeconomic impact analysis of the costs of such legislation for: (1) the period for which the cost estimate is prepared, and (2) the 10-fiscal year period beginning with the first fiscal year after the last fiscal year for which such estimate was prepared and each of the next two 10-fiscal year periods. Defines "major bill or resolution" as any bill or resolution whose budgetary effects, for any fiscal year in the period for which a CBO cost estimate is prepared, is estimated to be greater than .25% of the current projected U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) for that fiscal year. Requires the analysis to describe: (1) the potential economic impact of the bill or resolution on major economic variables, including real GDP, business investment, the capital stock, employment, and labor supply; and (2) the potential fiscal effects of the measure, including any estimates of revenue increases or decreases resulting from changes in GDP.

S. 183 Hospital Payment Fairness Act of 2013 S. 185The Baseline Reform Act