FY 2014 Budget

Winners and Losers from the Omnibus Legislation

Last month's Ryan-Murray budget deal set overall spending levels for the government at $1.1 trillion, but it did not set specific spending levels for each agency. On Monday, the Appropriations Committee released an omnibus spending bill detailing how the money is allocated between agencies, along with dozens of specific instructions directing what projects agencies must and must not fund.

The Omnibus Bill Has Passed the House

Lawmakers in the House moved quickly to pass the omnibus appropriations bill released two days ago with a 359-67 vote. Earlier in the day, the Senate passed a three-day continuing resolution by a 86-14 vote, clearing the way for passage of the broader package later in the week.

War Spending in the Omnibus Bill

Among the many things we noted yesterday on the blog about the omnibus appropriations bill was the similarity between war spending in the bill and in the past fiscal year. Spending for overseas contingency operations declined by only $1 billion -- from $93 billion to $92 billion -- between 2013 and 2014, and spending was more than $20 billion higher than what CBO assumes in its drawdown scenario.

Understanding the "Omnibus" Appropriations Bill

Last night, Congressional appropriators unveiled a $1.1 trillion omnibus appropriations bill that would fund the government for the rest of FY 2014. The announcement comes just in time to avoid a government shutdown after tomorrow; lawmakers are working on a three-day stopgap to buy time to pass the broader package.

Spending Agreement "Splits the Difference" for 2014

On Tuesday, Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Paul Ryan announced a budget deal that set discretionary spending levels for the next two years, removed some of sequestration's cuts, imposed targeted spending cuts and fee increases, and modestly reduced deficits over the next decade (see our full analysis of the deal).

WaPo: A Flawed Deal is Better Than No Deal

So far, reactions to the budget agreement have been mixed. As we said in our report yesterday, Understanding the Bipartisan Budget Act, the deal replaces short-term savings in sequestration with smarter, permanent savings from mandatory savings and user fees, a positive development. But it largely pushes the big decisions down the road.

Congress's Next Play: Don't Punt, Go For It!

We hope all of our readers enjoyed their Thanksgiving holiday. The long weekend brought some fantastic rivalry games, Michigan-Ohio State, Auburn-Alabama, Ravens-Steelers, and many more. Coaches often had to decide whether to punt or to go for it and keep the drive alive. But in Washington, where Congress has had clear opportunities to get our fiscal house in order, a new Fix the Debt infographic shows lawmakers have been doing much more punting than solving.

Understanding the Sequester

“The sequester” is an across-the-board spending cut designed in 2011 to force the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (“Supercommittee”) to agree on a broad deficit reduction package. Upon the failure of the Supercommittee, the sequester set into motion $109 billion of annual spending cuts each year from Fiscal Year 2013 (FY2013) through FY2021.

The King Plan: A Window Into a "Go Medium" Deal

In addition to CBO director Doug Elmendorf's testimony, yesterday's budget conference committee meeting produced another notable moment: a proposal from Sen. Angus King (I-ME) to replace part of the sequester with targeted and permanent reforms.

Replacing the Sequester With...More Sequester? No Deal

As the budget conference committee works to develop a plan to offset some of the sequester, they may be tempted to use budget gimmicks in place of hard choices (last week we warned against use of the war gimmick). One such gimmick would be to repeal most or all of the sequester now and pay for it by increasing the sequester later.

Syndicate content