Overview
Title
To amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to require the Congressional Budget Office to provide an analysis with respect to major legislation over time, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 2666 wants the people who check the country's money plans (CBO) to look at big laws every year for 10 years and see if they cost what was expected. If they're really off, they have to tell the grown-ups in charge why.
Summary AI
H.R. 2666, also known as the “CBO Scoring Accountability Act,” proposes changes to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. It requires the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to annually analyze and publicly report on the financial outcomes of major legislation for the first ten years after such legislation is enacted. The analysis must detail actual costs and federal revenue changes and compare them to prior estimates. If there is a significant discrepancy of 10% or more in costs or revenue, a detailed report must be submitted to Congress explaining the reasons.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Bill
The proposed legislation, H.R. 2666, known as the “CBO Scoring Accountability Act,” aims to enhance the oversight of major legislation by amending the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. The bill mandates the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to conduct annual analyses over ten years on any major legislation passed into law. The objective is to estimate the actual costs and changes in federal revenue, comparing these to previous estimates. If significant discrepancies occur, the CBO must report to Congress, detailing the reasons behind the differences. This approach requires cooperation from various government agencies to provide necessary information to the CBO.
Significant Issues with the Bill
Definition of 'Major Legislation'
A critical issue is how the bill defines "major legislation" based on a financial impact threshold. Specifically, it includes only those bills projected to impact federal spending or revenue by at least 0.25% of the U.S. GDP. This definition might exclude smaller-scale legislation that, while impactful, do not meet this economic criterion. Thus, there is concern that some important legislative actions could go unexamined under this bill.
Discrepancy Reporting
The bill specifies that only discrepancies of 10% or more between actual and estimated financial impacts need to be reported to Congress. This threshold could overlook smaller, yet cumulatively significant discrepancies, potentially overlooking issues that could affect budgetary planning and oversight.
Timing of Impact Analysis
The bill only mandates analysis after legislation has been enacted into law, potentially missing early opportunities to anticipate impacts during the legislative drafting and debate stages. This oversight could limit the bill's effectiveness in preventing unintended financial consequences.
Agency Assistance and Clarity
The language requiring agencies to assist the CBO is somewhat vague, specifying that assistance be given as "reasonably requested" by the CBO Director. This lack of specificity might lead to varying interpretations about what constitutes reasonable assistance, potentially resulting in inconsistent cooperation.
Broad Implication on the Public
Should this bill become law, it could lead to more transparent and accountable government spending and revenue policies, offering the public a clearer view of how major legislation impacts the nation's finances over time. However, due to its high threshold for what constitutes major legislation, its usefulness may be limited in scope. Regular fiscal tracking might provide greater insight into whether legislative actions are effectively supporting economic goals or leading to fiscal deficits.
Impact on Stakeholders
Government Agencies
Agencies are expected to bear the burden of supplying the CBO with necessary data and support, which might demand additional administrative resources. The broad language around assistance could lead to inefficient allocation of resources unless clearly defined.
Congressional Budget Office
The CBO would see an expanded role in governmental fiscal oversight, which could require additional staffing or funding to fulfill new mandates. This broader responsibility strengthens its role as a critical institution for fiscal accountability, but also places more pressure on its operations and resources.
Congress
Legislators might find the bill's reports and analysis useful for evaluating the long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of major legislation. However, the constraints on what is considered "major" might limit the bill’s overall utility in refining legislative effectiveness.
Public and Other Stakeholders
For the general public and other interested parties, the bill promises increased clarity and accountability in government fiscal operations, allowing more informed civic engagement. Yet, the limited range of legislation subjected to the bill’s provisions might temper public expectations regarding comprehensive fiscal oversight.
In conclusion, while the "CBO Scoring Accountability Act" presents a potentially beneficial step towards increasing legislative financial accountability, the bill's effectiveness is somewhat limited by its threshold definitions and scope of reporting. Addressing these issues could amplify its capacity to positively influence government transparency and fiscal responsibility.
Issues
The definition of 'major legislation' is based on a threshold of 0.25 percent of GDP, which could be too high and might exclude significant legislative actions with important implications that fall below this threshold. Such exclusion could prevent comprehensive analysis of impactful but smaller-scale legislation. This is mentioned in Sections 2(a) and 407(d).
The bill only requires reports to Congress if discrepancies in cost or revenue estimates are 10 percent or greater. This threshold might overlook smaller discrepancies that cumulatively have significant implications or indicate underlying issues. This concern is found in Sections 2(b)(1) and 2(b)(2).
The requirement for analysis only applies to legislation that has been enacted into law, which may miss the opportunity to assess and understand potential impacts during earlier stages of the legislative process, potentially affecting decision-making. This is highlighted in Section 407(a).
The language in the bill concerning agency assistance and what constitutes a 'reasonable request' from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office is vague, potentially leading to inconsistencies and inefficiencies in obtaining information. This issue is identified in Section 407(c).
There is a lack of clarity regarding the term 'discrepancy' in cost and revenue prediction differences, including how such discrepancies are calculated or quantified, leading to possible inconsistent application. This affects Sections 2(b) and 407(b).
The frequency of analysis is specified as 'not later than annually,' which may result in varying interpretations and infrequent updates, affecting the timeliness and relevance of the analyses. This issue is associated with Section 407(a).
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section states that the Act can be referred to as the "CBO Scoring Accountability Act."
2. Supplemental analysis with respect to major legislation Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section describes a new requirement for the Congressional Budget Office to annually analyze the financial impact of major legislation for ten years after it becomes law, comparing actual costs and revenue changes to previous estimates. If there is a significant discrepancy in these figures, the Director must report it to Congress, and any government agency must assist with this analysis if requested.
407. Supplemental estimates of major legislation Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section mandates that the Director of the Congressional Budget Office annually analyzes major legislation for 10 years to estimate costs and revenue changes, compare them to previous estimates, and update these estimates if needed. If there are significant discrepancies, the Director must report to Congress explaining these differences, and all relevant agencies must assist by providing necessary information. Major legislation is defined as any bill with a financial impact equal to or more than 0.25% of the U.S. GDP.