Overview
Title
To amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to require the Congressional Budget Office to provide an inflation estimate with respect to legislation with a significant impact on the gross domestic product of the United States, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to make sure that before big laws that could change America's money situation are discussed, a special office checks how they might make things more expensive. This helps people know if these new laws might make everything cost more, except when it's about emergencies or keeping the country safe.
Summary AI
The bill, S. 3895, proposes changes to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. It mandates the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to evaluate and provide inflation estimates for any major legislation that significantly impacts the United States' gross domestic product. This includes both short-term and long-term inflation effects, except for emergency aid or measures related to national security. The bill also establishes that Congress cannot consider major legislation without these CBO inflation forecasts.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed legislation, titled the "Informed Lawmaking to Combat Inflation Act," aims to amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 by requiring the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to provide inflation estimates for bills that significantly impact the U.S. economy. This proposed bill, S. 3895, introduced by Senators Manchin and Tillis, stipulates that the CBO should determine both short-term and long-term inflationary effects for major legislation before it can be considered by Congress.
General Summary of the Bill
This bill seeks to enhance fiscal accountability in the legislative process by mandating the CBO to conduct detailed inflation forecasts for any significant legislation defined as "major." Specifically, it targets bills that are predicted to affect at least 0.25% of the gross domestic product (GDP). Exempt from this requirement are bills concerning emergency relief, national security, or international treaty obligations. Importantly, bills cannot proceed in legislative sessions without these inflationary impact statements being made available.
Summary of Significant Issues
A prominent concern is the definition of "major legislation." While clearly set by the metric of impacting 0.25% of GDP, the exemptions for emergency measures could leave room for potentially impactful fiscal decisions to escape scrutiny. Moreover, there's a lack of specificity regarding the timelines for committees to submit legislation to the CBO, which could lead to delays in obtaining these crucial economic analyses.
The criteria for assessing "significant impact on inflation" are somewhat subjective. This ambiguity might lead to inconsistent application, creating scenarios where similar bills receive differing levels of scrutiny based on interpretative differences. There is also potential for political influence, as decisions about what constitutes major legislation can be swayed by the roles of the Speaker of the House or the President pro tempore.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, the intended outcome of this bill is greater economic transparency and accountability in legislative decision-making. By assessing the inflationary impact of significant legislation, lawmakers can make more informed decisions that consider long-term economic prosperity and stability. However, if significant bills are excluded from this review due to the aforementioned exemptions, the public might feel that not all impactful decisions are receiving necessary scrutiny.
Impact on Stakeholders
The bill positively impacts lawmakers by providing an additional layer of detailed economic forecasts that could inform more responsible policymaking. However, the CBO might face increased pressure and workload due to the need for timely and accurate analysis of potentially numerous bills labeled as major.
Conversely, the exemptions for emergency and national security measures might allow some government entities to execute urgent fiscal policies without delays, which can be vital in crisis scenarios. However, such exemptions could also be viewed as loopholes allowing for selective accountability.
Overall, while the bill proposes a framework that encourages transparency, various procedural and interpretive ambiguities may influence its effectiveness. The balance between comprehensive economic analysis and the expediency of legislative processes will be critical to watch should this proposal advance.
Issues
The definition of 'major legislation' in Section 407 could bypass inflation forecasting for measures related to emergency assistance, national security, or international treaties, creating accountability gaps where significant fiscal measures might evade scrutiny.
The criteria for determining 'significant impact on inflation' in Section 407 are subjective and may require clearer guidelines to avoid disputes, impacting the consistency and fairness of its application.
The absence of specific timelines for committees to provide major legislation to the Director in Section 407 could lead to delays in the inflation forecasting process, affecting timely legislative analysis.
The vague term 'quantifiable inflationary impact' in Section 2, subsection (c)(2)(B) could lead to varying interpretations and hinder consistent application, affecting the clarity and effectiveness of the legislation.
There are potential political influences in the roles of the Speaker of the House or President pro tempore in designating committees to report bills as major legislation in Section 407, which could affect impartiality.
The complexity and lack of clarity in enforcement and compliance requirements in Section 407, particularly regarding 'amended' or 'substitute' legislation, may complicate the practical application of inflation forecasting procedures.
The enforcement mechanisms in the House of Representatives under Section 407(e) are not clear about the repercussions for non-compliance, potentially leading to challenges in enforcement.
The lack of mechanisms to ensure the accuracy and accountability of the inflationary forecasts prepared by the Director in Section 407 might be an oversight, raising concerns about the reliability of the financial projections.
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
The first section provides the short title of the Act, which is called the “Informed Lawmaking to Combat Inflation Act.”
2. Legislative mandated inflation accountability and reform Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section of the bill mandates that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) must evaluate and report on the inflationary effects of any major legislation, defined as any bill significantly impacting the economy, excluding emergency and national security measures. If a bill is considered major, Congress cannot proceed with it unless the CBO has published a statement estimating its impact on inflation.
407. Mandatory inflation forecasting Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, the bill requires the Director of the Congressional Budget Office to analyze the inflation impacts of major legislation, defined as any bill with a budget effect of at least 0.25% of the U.S. GDP. Committees must provide the bills to the Director, who will estimate whether the legislation impacts inflation significantly; legislation cannot be considered until these reports are published, and specific rules apply to the House of Representatives regarding points of order on this process.