pay-as-you-go

My column from today's Roll Call explains why, contrary to what some may think, the fact that health care reform meets the Paygo rules of the congressional budget process is a reason to vote for rather than against the bill.

PAYGO Is Not a Reason to Oppose Health Care Reform

March 16, 2010

Pay-as-you-go, or PAYGO, is what supposedly forces Congress to offset the cost of doing something new so that it doesn’t make the deficit worse. For the past two decades, PAYGO either was a formal part of the Congressional budget process or, when it expired, was something many immediately and vehemently insisted be reinstated. Editorials promoted it. Budget hawks demanded it. Political parties tried to show it was one of their basic tenets. Democrats and Republicans both supported it.

Over at economistmom.com, Diane Rogers, does her usual good job reviewing the current bidding on PAYGO.  One of her conclusions is a reverse NIKE, that is, when it comes to tax cuts and spending increases, the best way to pay for them is to just not do it.

This is a good summary of the hearing held last Thursday by the House Budget Committee on PAYGO and, like almost everything Diane does, is well worth the few minutes it will take to read.  If you want to read the testimony itself, take a look here.

It looks like House Banking Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) and House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller (D-CA) are going to be the designated leaders for a stimulus bill in the House.  Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) may play the same role in the Senate.

Note who has not been designated: House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D-SC) and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND).