Considerations in Dynamic Scoring and Macroeconomic Modeling

8/21/2019 Considerations in Dynamic Scoring and Macroeconomic Modeling

1/20 WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.O

Considerations in Dynamic Scoringand Macroeconomic ModelingThe Link Between Tax Cuts, Inequality, and Growth

By Anna Chu March 2015


2/20

Considerations inDynamic Scoring andMacroeconomic ModelingThe Link Between Tax Cuts, Inequality, and Growth

By Anna Chu March 2015


3/20

1 Introduction and summary

3 Background on dynamic scoring

5 Trickle-down gimmicks

8 Tax policy, inequality, and growth

11 Recommendations: Considerations for CBO and JCT

13 Conclusion

14 About the author

15 Endnotes

Contents


4/20

1 Center for American Progress | Considerations in Dynamic Scoring and Macroeconomic Modeling

Introduction and summary

Under he simple rules o mah, wo plus wo equals our. Bu House Republican

congressional leaders’ new uzzy rules or evaluaing he budgeary impac o

legislaion blur he lines o simple mah.1 Under heir new rules, wo plus wo may

soon equal five.

As an opening salvo or he 114h Congress, in a “largely pary-line voe o 234-172,”

Republicans in he House adoped a rules package ha included a provision asking

he Congressional Budge Office, or CBO, and he Join Commitee on axaion, or JC, o use so-called dynamic scoring in heir evaluaion o a proposed legislaion’s

budgeary impac.2 Under he rule, CBO and JC would have o arrive a one

esimae o he economic impac o a proposed billa difficul and uncerain

endeavorand acor ha ino a final score o he bill’s budgeary impac. Tis

differs rom curren pracice, where CBO and JC provide, when requesed, a range

o esimaes based on differen assumpions and models o how he economy would

respond o policy changes. Compared wih dynamic scoring, his range o esimaed

impacs provides lawmakers wih more inormaion abou he possible impacs o a

proposed policy.

By requiring CBO and JC o whitle down he range o macroeconomic esimaes

ino one number or a final score, he rule would make CBO and JC pick and

choose which assumpions and models coun in he macroeconomic analysis. I one

o he assumpions is ha a boos in he economy may lead o more people working

and paying more axes, hen ha addiional ax revenue received by he governmen

would offse he official cos o a bill. Tus, on paper, he proposal would have a

lower official cos because o possibly uncerain and unrealisic assumpions ha

he proposal would generae economic growh. Tis move would make i easier

or policymakers o enac more ax cus based on he conservaive rickle-downmyhology ha ax cus or he rich grow he economy. I is especially elling ha he

rule inroduced by House Republican leaders3 would “or all pracical purposes …

apply almos exclusively o ax legislaion.”4 I seems ha since conservaives

canno ge ax cus hrough he ron door, hey are rying o ge hem hrough he

side door insead.


5/20


CBO and JC should no be orced o underake dynamic scoring. Bu since he

House passed he new rules package, responsible lawmakers should work wih CBO;

CBO’s new direcor, Keih Hall; and JC o ensure ha he so-called dynamic

scoring process is no hijacked as a vehicle o sell he conservaive rickle-down

myhology. Specifically, CBO and JC should consider he ollowing wo issues:

• The latest economic research. A growing body o empirical research undermines

he conservaive economic manra ha ax cus or he rich grow he economy.5

CBO and JC should ensure ha heir macroeconomic models reflec his

growing empirical evidence. A he same ime, more and more research suggess

ha rising inequaliy is holding back he naion’s economic growh.6 Given his,

CBO and JC should develop a macroeconomic model ha considers how a

proposed bill would impac inequaliyand hereore economic growh. While

his may be an evolving and ime-consuming process, reasonable seps can be

made oward his goal, including a CBO and JC sudy on inequaliy’s impac

on economic growh.

• The distributional impact of tax policies. Given he evidence ha or many

households, marke incomes are sagnan or declining,7 and given he emerging

evidence ha rising income inequaliy is holding back economic growh,8 CBO

and JC should conduc an analysis o he disribuional impac o ax policies.

I a proposed ax policy were o increase income inequaliy, CBO and JC should

deermine how ha increased inequaliy hurs economic growh and acor ha

ino heir dynamic score. Addiionally, CBO and JC should consider how ax

cus given o cerain income brackes could impac consumpion and demand.


6/20


Background on dynamic scoring

CBO and JC are boh radiionally objecive, nonparisan insiuions, bu

dynamic scoring hreaens o enshrine conservaive rickle-down philosophy in

hem, easing he passage o bills o cu axes or he rich. In order o undersand

he impacs o hese proposed changes, i is imporan o undersand how CBO

and JC currenly score and analyze spending and ax measures, how dynamic

scoring changes hose procedures, and why i is problemaic o do so.

Current approach

CBO and JC currenly do no consider a proposed bill’s effec on economic growh

in producing an esimae o is budgeary impac.9 CBO and JC do, however,

consider he microeconomic, direc behavioral effecs o a specific policy. For

example, CBO and JC’s analysis o an increase in gasoline axes esimaes how

much less gas Americans would buy because o he higher effecive cos.10 Tus,

curren scoring pracices are no saichey simply leave ou more speculaive

indirec effecs, such as he indirec effecs proposals migh have on labor supply

and how hose effecs migh affec ederal revenues.

Under he curren approach, congressional members who are considering specific

proposals may reques a separae analysis rom CBO and JC o he macroeconomic

effecs o he proposal. o arrive a hese broader, indirec impacs, CBO and JC

will use a range o economic models and assumpions and repor on he resuls

rom each. JC specifically saed ha he goals or is models include he “abiliy

o reflec he range o resuls based on varying modeling assumpions and resuls

rom economic research.”11


7/20


An example o JC’s macroeconomic analysis is is esimaes o he macroeconomic

impac o ormer House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp’s (R-MI) ax

reorm proposal. Tis proposal used wo differen models and varying assumpions

in is analysis and produced eigh esimaes, ranging rom a projeced 0.1 percen

increase in gross domesic produc, or GDP, all he way o 1.6 percen. Te revenue

esimaes ranged rom $50 billion o $700 billion in addiional revenue over 10 years.12 By conras, under JC’s convenional score o he budgeary impac o he

bill ha did no acor in he range o economic impacs, Rep. Camp’s ax proposal

would be almos budge neural over a 10-year window bu would add o he defici

in muliple years.13 O course, he esimae ha he proposal migh bring in $700

billion in new revenue makes i much more palaable o policymakers and he

public han he convenional score o he proposal. No surprisingly, Rep. Camp

promoed he $700 billion esimae.14

Dynamic scoring

Dynamic scoring would require CBO and JC o include an esimae o he

macroeconomic effecs o a bill in heir official score. Tis may include esimaing

how a change in he ax law migh affec he labor supply and how an expanded or

conraced labor supply may, in urn, affec he amoun o axes colleced. Te

process o esimaing he macroeconomic impac o legislaion becomes highly

problemaic, however, when CBO and JC are orced o pick one ou o a range o

esimaes in order o arrive a a final score. As Rep. Camp’s proposal illusraes, he

esimaes o he macroeconomic effecs o ax policies are highly sensiive o he

assumpions made and he models used. Rep. Camp’s proposal showcases how

difficul i is o capure he economic impacs o poenial legislaion. Obaining

he mean or median o he esimaes is also problemaic because hey are sill

subjec o he wide variances in he assumpions made and models used, while

providing less useul inormaion or policymakers.


8/20


Trickle-down gimmicks

Despie he difficulies in arriving a a single esimae o he macroeconomic impac

o a proposed bill, House Republicans passed a rule o orce dynamic scoring upon

CBO and JC. Tis is especially problemaic in ligh o he ac ha he House rule

imposing dynamic scoring would or all pracical purposes apply “almos exclusively

o ax legislaion.”15

How dynamic scoring could be manipulated to serve theconservative tax agenda

Undersanding how he conservaive rickle-down ax ideology could be enshrined

in he legislaive process hrough dynamic scoring requires a brie explanaion o

some o he conceps surrounding ax reorm, saring wih revenue neuraliy.

House Ways and Means Commitee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) has avored

“revenue-neural” corporae ax reorm.16 Generally, a revenue-neural ax reorm

would neiher increase nor decrease oal ax revenues, even i some provisions

raise revenue and some lose revenue. Tis could heoreically be accomplished by

eliminaing some ax loopholes while simulaneously reducing overall ax raes.

However, he process o finding ax loopholes o cu is a difficul endeavor. Every

ax loophole is enjoyed by a differen consiuency ha would ofen figh ooh

and nail o proec i. Bu i CBO or JC were o adop a dynamic score wih very

opimisic assumpions abou he impac o ax cus on he economy, hen he

reorm proposal would appear cheaper and hus would no need o cu as many

loopholes in order o mainain revenue neuraliy on paper.

Wha his means in real lie is ha Rep. Ryan, who previously proposed cutingpersonal ax raes or he very rich down o 25 percen, may no acually have o

pay or much o any proposed ax cus.17 Insead, dynamic scoring could lead o

Rep. Ryan’s proposals appearing cheaper han hey really are, and hus, he would

no have o cu as many loopholes o pay or his ax cus or he rich. Wha helps

Rep. Ryan pass his proposals, hough, is harmul o he economy. Tese unpaid-


9/20


or ax cus or he rich will no jus add o he ederal defici, bu more and more

research indicaes ha hey may also increase inequaliy.18 As discussed in he nex

secion, he evidence suggess ha such irresponsible ax cus could acually slow

down economic growh.

The failure of tr ickle-down tax cuts to generate economic growth

Te heory underlying he conservaive ax agenda is ha ax cus or he rich will

rickle down o everyone else and help grow he economy. Under he rickle-down

view, lower op ax raes would allow he rich o keep more o heir money, giving

hem more money o inves back ino he economy and an addiional incenive o

work harder. However, anoher heory argues ha when lower op ax raes give

he rich more money, hey can work less o mainain he same sandard o living. I

hese wo incenives cancel each oher ou, hen cuting axes or he rich would

have no meaningul impac on he economy.19

Indeed, a growing body o credible economic research shows ha ax cus or he

rich have litle relaionship wih economic growh. Analysis o op U.S. ax raes

since 1945 conduced by he nonparisan Congressional Research Service, or CRS,

ound litle evidence o a relaionship beween he reducion o op ax raes and

increased savings, invesmen, or producive growh.20 CRS examined wheher

here was any relaionship beween op marginal ax raes or op capial gains ax

raes wih saving and invesmen, produciviy growh, and real per-capia GDP

growh. Regression analysis did no find a saisically significan relaionship,

suggesing ha op ax raes do no have any significan connecion o invesmens,

produciviy growh, or he real GDP growh rae.21

Meanwhile, a recen review o economic research on ax changes and economic

growh by he ax Policy Cener showed ha unpaid-or ax cus have litle posiive

impac on economic growh.22 For example, an analysis o he impac o he 2001

and 2003 ax cus passed by ormer Presiden George W. Bush yielded “no

firs-order evidence in he aggregae daa ha hese ax cus generaed growh.”23

Insead, by adding o he defici, he unpaid-or ax cus reduced public savings

more han hey increased privae savings and acually raised he cos o capial.Te negaive effecs o higher deficis and reduced public savings ouweighed any

posiive effecs o he ax cus. Bu wha he ax cus did do was help he rich by

“crea[ing] windall gains or he owners o old capial.”24 In oher words, ax cus

did no rickle down o help he broader public; insead, hey jus helped hose

who already had capial.


10/20


Te recen example o Kansas’ exreme ax cu agenda deals anoher blow o he

conservaive myh. Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R), a big supporer o rickle-

down economics, pushed or massive, unpaid-or ax cus ha he claimed would

ac “like a sho o an adrenaline ino he hear o he Kansas economy.”25 In 2012,

Kansas cu he op personal income ax raes rom 6.45 percen or income over

$60,000 and 6.25 percen or income beween $30,000 and $60,000 or marriedcouples o 4.9 percen on income over $30,000.26 Te sae also cu he ax rae on

income under $30,000 rom 3.5 percen o 3 percen.27 In 2013, Kansas cu he

op rae urher, rom 4.9 percen o 3.9 percen by 2018.28

Gov. Brownback’s rickle-down dream experimen quickly urned ino a nighmare.

Insead o boosing he economy, Kansas’ economy lagged behind he neighboring

region and he counry in job growh. An analysis by he Kansas Cener or

Economic Growh shows ha Kansas’ job growh was below 3 percen in he ourh

quarer o 2014, while i was above 3.5 percen or he six-sae Midwes region and

more han 4 percen or he naion.29 And ar rom paying or isel in new revenue,in fiscal year 2014, revenues in Kansas were down $700 million.30 Te oulook is

so bad or Kansas ha Sandard & Poor’s downgraded Kansas’ bond raing rom

“AA+” o “AA,” ciing is “srucurally unbalanced budge.”31

No only is he evideniary case ha ax cus or

he rich boos economic growh scan a bes,

bu a Cener on Budge and Policy Prioriies

comparison o he impacs o a 1993 ax hike

and he 2001 ax cu showed ha job creaion

and economic growh were acually sronger in

he years afer he 1993 ax increases han in he

years ollowing he 2001 ax cus.32 A Cener or

American Progress examinaion showed ha a

low op marginal ax rae is acually associaed

wih weak economic growh.33 Alhough

correlaion does no mean causaion, hese

examples undermine he conservaive ax manra.

FIGURE 1

Top marginal tax rates and economic growth

Average annual growth rate of real GDP, by top marginal tax

1950 to 2013

Sources: Tax Policy Center, "Historical Individual Income Tax Parameters," available athttp://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?DocID=543&Topic2id=30&Topic3id=38; BurEconomic Analysis, "National Economic Accounts," available at http://www.bea.gov/national/Index.htm(last accessed February 2015).

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

28–35% 38–50% 69–70% 71–92%

2.1%

3.3%3.6%

4.0%

Top marginal tax rate

A v e r a g e a n n u a l r e a l G D P g r o w t h r a t e


11/20


Tax policy, inequality, and growth

Tax cuts for the rich are linked to rising inequality

Te widely acceped conservaive hinking ha ax cus or he rich rickle down

and generae economic growh is being challenged by growing evidence ha ax

cus or he rich simply make he rich richer and increase inequaliy. Tomas

Pikety, Emmanuel Saez, and Seanie Sancheva released an analysis o daa rom

18 counries in he Organisaion or Economic Co-operaion and Developmen,

or OECD, finding no correlaion beween changes in heir op ax raes andeconomic growh. Insead, here was a srong correlaion beween lower op ax

raes and higher levels o income inequaliy among he counries sudied, including

he Unied Saes.34

Te economic analysis o op ax raes by CRS similarly indicaed ha cuting op

ax raes is associaed wih “increasing concenraion o income a he op o he

income disribuion.”35 CRS examined he relaionship beween op ax raes and

he share o oal incomes going o he op 0.1 percen and op 0.01 percen since

1945. I ound a srong, saisically significan, and negaive relaionship beween

he op ax raes and he share o income going o he op, “sugges[ing] ha as he

op ax raes are reduced, he share o income accruing o he op o he income

disribuion increasesha is, income dispariies increase.”36 In conclusion, CRS

ound ha “op ax raes appear o have litle or no relaion o he size o he

economic pie,” meaning ha cuting axes or he rich has no been shown o grow

he economy. Insead, cuting axes or he rich is associaed wih making he rich

richer and increasing inequaliy.37

Te experience o he 1993 Omnibus Budge Reconciliaion Ac, which raised axes

on he op income earners by creaing wo new upper-end ax brackes, is alsoinsrucive.38 A he ime, some Republicans in Congress warned ha he ax hikes

would kill he economic recovery and pu he counry back ino a recession.39

However, no only did he economy boom, bu he ax sysem reduced inequaliy

more ollowing he changes. When looking a he level o inequaliy beore axes


12/20


and afer axesas measured by he Gini coefficienwe find ha he ax sysem

reduced inequaliy by 7 percen afer axes in 1992.40 In comparison, in 1994he

firs ull year afer he ax changeshe ax sysem reduced inequaliy by 8.7

percen, a 23 percen increase in he ax sysem’s inequaliy reducion.41

Conversely, he 2001 and 2003 Bush ax cus lowered raes or everyone bu madehe sysem less progressive and reduced he ax code’s effec on inequaliy.42 Beween

2001 and 2004, he ax code’s reducion in inequaliy ell rom 8.6 percenage

poins o 7.8 percenage poins, a 10 percen reducion.43 Looking a he reduc-

ions saring in 2001 raher han 2000 is more elling because he end o he

echnology sock bubble grealy reduced marke-produced inequaliy.

FIGURE 2

The tax system reduces inequality more when taxes increase at the top

The change in inequality before and after taxes, as measured by the percentagedifference in pre- and post-tax Gini coefficients

Source: Author's analysis of data from the Congressional Budget Office, "The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2011:Supplemental Data" (2014), available at https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49440.

1992 1994 2001 2004

Before

1993 tax change 2001 and 2003 tax changes

After Before After

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

7.1%

8.7% 8.6%7.8%

Growing body of research shows rising inequality is holding back

economic growth

Lawmakers should be concerned abou he impac o policy changes on incomeinequaliy, especially wih he ever-growing body o research ha shows ha rising

inequaliy may be holding back economic growh.


13/20


Recenly, he Washingon Cener or Equiable Growh released a review o he

economic research on inequaliy and economic growh.44 Te recen research

suggess ha while some amoun o economic inequaliybu no exreme

inequaliymay have some shor- and medium-erm benefis, “higher levels o

income inequaliy are derimenal o long-erm economic growh.”45 Indeed, research

conduced by Ugo Panizza o he U.N. Conerence on rade and Developmenound ha across U.S. saes, higher inequaliy is associaed wih lower growh raes,

while a srong middle class is associaed wih higher growh raes.46 Meanwhile,

research conduced by economiss a he World Bank and he Ciy Universiy o

New York ha examined sae-level daa in he Unied Saes ound ha “high

levels o inequaliy reduce he income growh o he poor and, i anyhing, help

he growh o he rich.”47

Inernaional research also suggess a negaive relaionship beween inequaliy and

growh. Te Inernaional Moneary Fund, or IMF, released research ha showed

ha counries wih more inequaliy experience more unsable growh.48 Addiionally, he IMF ound ha some o he policies aken o address inequaliy

may spur aser growh.49 Tis held rue in boh developed and developing counries.

Te OECD also recenly ound ha counries where income inequaliy was alling

experienced aser growh han counries where inequaliy was rising.50 Tis

growing body o research suppors middle-ou economicsha prosperiy and

economic growh comes rom he middle class ou, no rom he op down.

Academic researchers are no he only ones saying ha inequaliy may be harming

economic growh. Indeed, Wall Sree is jumping on he bandwagon. In Augus

2014, credi raing agency Sandard & Poor’s sounded he alarm “ha he curren

level o income inequaliy in he U.S. is dampening GDP growh.”51 Te high level

o inequaliy in he counry led Sandard & Poor’s o reduce is 10-year U.S. growh

orecas rom 2.8 percen o 2.5 percen.52 Ten, in Sepember, Morgan Sanley,

hardly a banner carrier or progressive policies, recognized ha a weakened middle

class means ha i no longer has he consumpion power needed o boos he

economy. Insead, weak wage growh is resuling in weaker domesic demand,

which is huring he economy. Morgan Sanley warned invesors ha “sronger

growh in wages and salaries is essenial o he macro oulook.”53


14/20


Recommendations:

Considerations for CBO and JCT

Te macroeconomic analysis conduced by CBO and JC provides he mos

useul inormaion i i can reflec a range o possible oucomes based on various

assumpions and models and i i reflecs sae-o-he ar, credible economic research.

As discussed in his repor and as highlighed by oher organizaions such as he

Cener on Budge and Policy Prioriies,54 he Commitee or a Responsible Federal

Budge,55 and he Washingon Cener or Equiable Growh,56 orcing CBO and

JC o pick a single macroeconomic oucome or he purposes o a dynamic score

is highly problemaic. Bu as hese insiuions are orced o conduc dynamicscoring by some congressional leaders, oher, more responsible leaders should ensure

ha CBO and JC’s macroeconomic analysis reflecs he mos curren economic

research and is no used as a vehicle o promoe he rickle-down ax manra.

In paricular, CBO and JC should consider he ollowing wo acors.

The latest economic research

Given he mouning research dispelling he conservaive myh ha ax cus or he

rich grow he economy, CBO and JC should ensure ha hey do no use overly

opimisic assumpions abou he economic impacs o ax cus or he rich. Insead,

in ligh o growing research linking ax cus or he rich o rising inequaliy 57 and

rising inequaliy o slower economic growh,58 CBO and JC should develop a

macroeconomic model ha considers how a proposed bill would impac inequaliy

and growh.

Alhough developing such models may be a ime-inensive endeavor, orgoing his

analysis would deprive policymakers o criical consideraions as hey debae he bes mechanisms wih which o improve he naion’s economy and deliver prosperiy

o he American people. Congressional leaders could pursue inerim seps in his

process, including requesing ha CBO and JC conduc an economic analysis o

he relaionship beween inequaliy and growh.


15/20


The distributional impact of tax cuts

CBO and JC should also conduc a disribuional analysis o proposed ax policies.

In ligh o research showing ha ax cus or he rich are linked o rising inequaliy, 59

CBO and JC should examine how proposed ax cus impac differen income

brackes and wheher he cus may increase inequaliy and slow down economicgrowh. Te resuls o his analysis should be ed back ino any macroeconomic

modeling or he legislaion.

An addiional consideraion or CBO and JC is how ax cus or differen income

brackes would affec consumpion and demand, a concern especially when demand

is low. Middle- and lower-income amilies have a lower savings rae han he rich

and a higher propensiy o consume,60 boosing demand in he economy. I we have

learned one hing in he pas decade, i is ha he economy can all shor on demand

or an exended period o ime.


16/20


Conclusion

In 2012, Republican presidenial candidae and ormer Massachusets Gov. Mit

Romney and his running mae Rep. Paul Ryan came under fire or ailing basic

mah when hey proposed significan ax cus and ax changes ha would

disproporionaely benefi he rich and claimed ha hey would no need o raise

axes on he middle class o do so.61 Insead o learning rom hose misakes and

adjusing heir policies, Republicans in Congress are sill atemping o adjus he

basic rules o mah.62

CBO and JC should no be orced o adop dynamic scoring. In his poliical realiy

where Republicans conrol boh he House and he Senae and are demanding

ha CBO and JC adop dynamic scoring, however, CBO and JC may no have

a choice. In his scenario, progressive leaders in Congress should do all hey can o

ensure ha he macroeconomic models used in CBO and JC’s dynamic scoring

o proposals reflecs he dearh o proo ha ax cus or he rich grow he economy,

as well as he growing body o economic research ha shows ha inequaliy is

holding back he naion’s economic growh.


17/20


About the author

Anna Chu is he Direcor o he Middle-Ou Economics projec a he Cener or

American Progress. She brings experience working on a muliude o economic

campaigns as he Policy Direcor or he TinkProgress War Room a he Cener

or American Progress Acion Fund.

She also served as he policy direcor or he Democraic Senaorial Campaign

Commitee during he successul 2012 cycle in which Democras added wo seas

o heir Senae majoriy. As policy direcor, Chu oversaw and managed all policy

issues or he commitee and Democraic Senae candidaes. Prior o working a

he Democraic Senaorial Campaign Commitee, Chu was he policy advisor or

he House Democraic Caucus, where she managed several congressional ask

orces. She previously served as a ederal law clerk and worked as an associae a

Paul Hasings.

Chu graduaed rom he Universiy o Caliornia, Berkeley, and earned a J.D. rom

he Universiy o Souhern Caliornia.


18/20


Endnotes

1 Brian Faler, “House adopts new math rules to boost taxcuts,” Politico, January 6, 2015, available at http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-tax-cuts-114010.html.

2 Ibid.

3 Rebecca Shabad and Bernie Becker, “GOP unveilsproposal to require ‘dynamic’ scoring on major bills,”

The Hill, December 23, 2014, available at http://thehill.com/policy/finance/228025-gop-unveils-proposal-to-require-dynamic-scoring-on-major-bills.

4 Robert G. Lynch, “The benefits and drawbacks of usingdynamic scoring in the federal budget” (Washington:Washington Center for Equitable Growth, 2015), availableat http://equitablegrowth.org/research/benefits-drawbacks-using-dynamic-scoring-federal-budget/.

5 Harry Stein and Michael Madowitz, “How the RyanBudget Fails Our Economy By Failing Economics”(Washington: Center for American Progress, 2014),available at https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/report/2014/04/09/87430/how-the-ryan-budget-fails-our-economy-by-failing-economics/;

Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, “Top Incomes andthe Great Recession: Recent Evolutions and PolicyImplications,” Paper presented at the 13th JacquesPolak Annual Research Conference, November 8–9,2012, available at http://www.imf.org/external/np/res/seminars/2012/arc/pdf/PS.pdf ; William G. Gale andAndrew A. Samwick, “Effects of Income Tax Changes onEconomic Growth” (Washington: Brookings Institution,2014), available at http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/09/09-effects-income-tax-changes-economic-growth-gale-samwick .

6 Standard & Poor’s, “How Increasing Income Inequality IsDampening U.S. Economic Growth, And Possible Ways

To Change The Tide,” August 5, 2014, available athttps://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13.

7 Drew DeSilver, “For most workers, real wages have barelybudged for decades,” Pew Research Fact Tank, October9, 2014, available at http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/.


To Change The Tide.”

9 Paul N. Van de Water and Chye-Ching Huang, “Budgetand Tax Plans Should Not Rely on ‘Dynamic Scoring’”(Washington: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,2014), available at h ttp://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3598.

10 Congressional Budget Office, “The Economic Costs ofFuel Economy Standards Versus a Gasoline Tax” (2003),

available at www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/12-24-03_cafe.pdf .

11 Joint Committee on Taxation, “Macroeconomic Analysisat the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Mechanicsof Its Implementation: Outline of Presentation of theJoint Committee Staff at the Brookings InstitutionProgram ‘Dynamic Scoring: Now What?’” (2015),available at https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4687.

12 Joint Committee on Taxation, “Macroeconomic Analysisof the ‘Tax Reform Act of 2014’” (2014), available athttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/

jct_macroeconomic_analysis_jcx_22_14__022614.pdf; Van de Water and Huang, “Why Budget and Tax PlansShouldn’t Use Dynamic Scoring.”

13 Joint Committee on Taxation, “Macroeconomic Analysisof the ‘Tax Reform Act of 2014’”; The Bottom Line,“Revenue Impacts of Camp’s Tax Reform Proposal,”February 26, 2014, available at http://crfb.org/blogs/revenue-impacts-camps-tax-reform-proposal; JointCommittee on Taxation, “Estimated Revenue Effects ofthe ‘Tax Reform Act of 2014’,” February 26, 2014, availableat http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/

jct_revenue_estimate__jcx_20_14__022614.pdf .

14 House Committee on Ways and Means, “Camp releasestax reform plan to strengthen the economy and makethe tax code simpler, fairer, and flatter,” Press release,February 26, 2014, available at http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=370987.

15 Lynch, “The benefits and drawbacks of using dynamicscoring in the federal budget.”

16 Damian Paletta, “Paul Ryan to Pursue Business TaxOverhaul in 2015,” Washington Wire, December 2, 2014,available at http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/12/02/ryan-to-pursue-business-tax-overhaul-in-2015/.

17 Tony Nitti, “Tax Aspects of Paul Ryan’s FY 2014Republican Budget Proposal,” Forbes, March 12, 2013,available at http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/03/12/tax-aspects-of-paul-ryans-fy-2014-republican-budget-proposal/.

18 Stein and Madowitz, “How the Ryan Budget Fails OurEconomy By Failing Economics”; Piketty and Saez, “TopIncomes and the Great Recession.”

19 Stein and Madowitz, “How the Ryan Budget Fails OurEconomy By Failing Economics.”

20 Thomas L. Hungerford, “Taxes and the Economy: AnEconomic Analysis of Top Tax Rates Since 1945 ”(Washington: Congressional Research Service, 2012),available at http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/r42729_0917.pdf .

21 Ibid.

22 Gale and Samwick, “Effects of Income Tax Changes onEconomic Growth.”

23 Ibid.

24 Ibid.

25 Michael Hiltzik, “How Tea Party tax cuts are turningKansas into a smoking ruin,”Los Angeles Times, July 10,2014, available at http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-kansas-a-smoking-ruin-20140709-

column.html.

26 Ibid.

27 Michael Leachman, “Lessons for Other States fromKansas’ Massive Tax Cuts” (Washington: Center onBudget Policy and Priorities, 2014), available at http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=4110.

28 Ibid.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-tax-cuts-114010.htmlhttp://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-tax-cuts-114010.htmlhttp://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-tax-cuts-114010.htmlhttp://thehill.com/policy/finance/228025-gop-unveils-proposal-to-require-dynamic-scoring-on-major-billshttp://thehill.com/policy/finance/228025-gop-unveils-proposal-to-require-dynamic-scoring-on-major-billshttp://thehill.com/policy/finance/228025-gop-unveils-proposal-to-require-dynamic-scoring-on-major-billshttp://equitablegrowth.org/research/benefits-drawbacks-using-dynamic-scoring-federal-budget/http://equitablegrowth.org/research/benefits-drawbacks-using-dynamic-scoring-federal-budget/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/report/2014/04/09/87430/how-the-ryan-budget-fails-our-economy-by-failing-economics/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/report/2014/04/09/87430/how-the-ryan-budget-fails-our-economy-by-failing-economics/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/report/2014/04/09/87430/how-the-ryan-budget-fails-our-economy-by-failing-economics/http://www.imf.org/external/np/res/seminars/2012/arc/pdf/PS.pdfhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/res/seminars/2012/arc/pdf/PS.pdfhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/09/09-effects-income-tax-changes-economic-growth-gale-samwickhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/09/09-effects-income-tax-changes-economic-growth-gale-samwickhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/09/09-effects-income-tax-changes-economic-growth-gale-samwickhttps://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3598http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3598http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/12-24-03_cafe.pdfhttp://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/12-24-03_cafe.pdfhttps://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4687https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4687http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_macroeconomic_analysis_jcx_22_14__022614.pdfhttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_macroeconomic_analysis_jcx_22_14__022614.pdfhttp://crfb.org/blogs/revenue-impacts-camps-tax-reform-proposalhttp://crfb.org/blogs/revenue-impacts-camps-tax-reform-proposalhttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_revenue_estimate__jcx_20_14__022614.pdfhttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_revenue_estimate__jcx_20_14__022614.pdfhttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=370987http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=370987http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=370987http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/12/02/ryan-to-pursue-business-tax-overhaul-in-2015/http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/12/02/ryan-to-pursue-business-tax-overhaul-in-2015/http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/03/12/tax-aspects-of-paul-ryans-fy-2014-republican-budget-proposal/http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/03/12/tax-aspects-of-paul-ryans-fy-2014-republican-budget-proposal/http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/03/12/tax-aspects-of-paul-ryans-fy-2014-republican-budget-proposal/http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/r42729_0917.pdfhttp://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/r42729_0917.pdfhttp://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-kansas-a-smoking-ruin-20140709-column.htmlhttp://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-kansas-a-smoking-ruin-20140709-column.htmlhttp://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-kansas-a-smoking-ruin-20140709-column.htmlhttp://www.kansas.com/2012/07/29/2424351/gov-sam-brownback-tax-cuts-needed.htmlhttp://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=4110http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=4110http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=4110http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=4110http://www.kansas.com/2012/07/29/2424351/gov-sam-brownback-tax-cuts-needed.htmlhttp://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-kansas-a-smoking-ruin-20140709-column.htmlhttp://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-kansas-a-smoking-ruin-20140709-column.htmlhttp://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-kansas-a-smoking-ruin-20140709-column.htmlhttp://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/r42729_0917.pdfhttp://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/r42729_0917.pdfhttp://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/03/12/tax-aspects-of-paul-ryans-fy-2014-republican-budget-proposal/http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/03/12/tax-aspects-of-paul-ryans-fy-2014-republican-budget-proposal/http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/03/12/tax-aspects-of-paul-ryans-fy-2014-republican-budget-proposal/http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/12/02/ryan-to-pursue-business-tax-overhaul-in-2015/http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/12/02/ryan-to-pursue-business-tax-overhaul-in-2015/http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=370987http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=370987http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=370987http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_revenue_estimate__jcx_20_14__022614.pdfhttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_revenue_estimate__jcx_20_14__022614.pdfhttp://crfb.org/blogs/revenue-impacts-camps-tax-reform-proposalhttp://crfb.org/blogs/revenue-impacts-camps-tax-reform-proposalhttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_macroeconomic_analysis_jcx_22_14__022614.pdfhttp://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jct_macroeconomic_analysis_jcx_22_14__022614.pdfhttps://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4687https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4687http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/12-24-03_cafe.pdfhttp://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/12-24-03_cafe.pdfhttp://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3598http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3598http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/09/for-most-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13https://www.globalcreditportal.com/ratingsdirect/renderArticle.do?articleId=1351366&SctArtId=255732&from=CM&nsl_code=LIME&sourceObjectId=8741033&sourceRevId=1&fee_ind=N&exp_date=20240804-19:41:13http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/09/09-effects-income-tax-changes-economic-growth-gale-samwickhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/09/09-effects-income-tax-changes-economic-growth-gale-samwickhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/09/09-effects-income-tax-changes-economic-growth-gale-samwickhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/res/seminars/2012/arc/pdf/PS.pdfhttp://www.imf.org/external/np/res/seminars/2012/arc/pdf/PS.pdfhttps://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/report/2014/04/09/87430/how-the-ryan-budget-fails-our-economy-by-failing-economics/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/report/2014/04/09/87430/how-the-ryan-budget-fails-our-economy-by-failing-economics/https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/report/2014/04/09/87430/how-the-ryan-budget-fails-our-economy-by-failing-economics/http://equitablegrowth.org/research/benefits-drawbacks-using-dynamic-scoring-federal-budget/http://equitablegrowth.org/research/benefits-drawbacks-using-dynamic-scoring-federal-budget/http://thehill.com/policy/finance/228025-gop-unveils-proposal-to-require-dynamic-scoring-on-major-billshttp://thehill.com/policy/finance/228025-gop-unveils-proposal-to-require-dynamic-scoring-on-major-billshttp://thehill.com/policy/finance/228025-gop-unveils-proposal-to-require-dynamic-scoring-on-major-billshttp://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-tax-cuts-114010.htmlhttp://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-tax-cuts-114010.htmlhttp://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/house-tax-cuts-114010.html


19/20


29 Kansas Center for Economic Growth, “Fool KansasOnce… ‘100,000 New Jobs’ Promise Doesn’t Stack Up toCurrent Growth,” January 28, 2015, available at http://realprosperityks.com/fool-kansans-100000-new-jobs-promise-doesnt-stack-current-growth/.

30 Letter from Kansas Legislative Research Department toLegislative Budget Committee, July 18, 2014, availableat http://www.kslegresearch.org/SGF/2014_SGF_June_Receipts.pdf ; Michael Leachman, “A DeservedDowngrade of Kansas’ Bonds,” Off the Charts, August11, 2014, available at http://www.offthechartsblog.org/

a-deserved-downgrade-of-kansas-bonds/.

31 Reid Wilson, “Kansas bond rating downgraded after taxcuts,” GovBeat, August 6, 2014, available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/06/kansas-bond-rating-downgraded-after-tax-cuts/.

32 Chye-Ching Huang, “Recent Studies Find Raising Taxeson High-Income Households Would Not Harm theEconomy: Policy Should Be Included in Balanced Deficit-Reduction Effort” (Washington: Center on Budget andPolicy Priorities, 2012), available at http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3756; Gale and Samwick, “Effectsof Income Tax Changes on Economic Growth.”

33 Stein and Madowitz, “How the Ryan Budget Fails OurEconomy By Failing Economics.”

34 Ibid.; Piketty and Saez, “Top Incomes and the Great

Recession.”

35 Hungerford, “Taxes and the Economy: An EconomicAnalysis of Top Tax Rates Since 1945.”

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid.

38 The Bancroft Library at the University of California,Berkeley, “1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act,”available at http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/projects/debt/1993reconciliationact.html (last accessedFebruary 2015).

39 Pat Garofalo, “Flashback: In 1993, GOP warned thatClinton’s tax plan would ‘kill jobs,’ ‘kill the currentrecovery’,” ThinkProgress, August 10, 2010, available athttp://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/08/10/

173450/1993-quotes/.

40 Author’s analysis of data from Congressional BudgetOffice, “The Distribution of Household Income andFederal Taxes, 2011: Supplementary Data” (2014),available at https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49440.

41 Ibid.

42 Ibid.

43 Ibid.

44 Heather Boushey and Carter C. Price, “How AreEconomic Inequality and Growth Connected? A Reviewof Recent Research” (Washington: Washington Centerfor Equitable Growth, 2014), available at http://ms.techprogress.org/ms-content/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/100914-ineq-growth.pdf.

45 Ibid.

46 Ugo G. Panizza, “Income Inequality and Economic Growth:Evidence from American Data,” Journal of EconomicGrowth 7 (1) ( 2002): 25–41; Boushey and Price, “How AreEconomic Inequality and Growth Connected?”

47 Roy van der Weide and Branko Milanovic, “Inequality IsBad for Growth of the Poor (But Not for that of theRich).” Working Paper 6963 (World Bank Group, 2014),available at http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-6963.

48 Andrew G. Berg and Jonathan D. Ostry, “Inequality andUnsustainable Growth: Two Sides of the Same Coin?”(Washington: International Monetary Fund, 2011),available at https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2011/sdn1108.pdf ; Boushey and Price, “How AreEconomic Inequality and Growth Connected?”

49 Jonathan D. Ostry, Andrew Berg, and Charalambos G. Tsangarides, “Redistribution, Inequality, and Growth”(Washington: International Monetary Fund, 2014),available at http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdf ; Boushey and Price, “How AreEconomic Inequality and Growth Connected?”

50 Federico Cingano, “Trends in income inequality and itsimpact on economic growth.” Working Paper 163(Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment, 2014), available at http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-eco-nomic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-en.


To Change The Tide.”

52 Ibid.

53 Morgan Stanley, “US Economics: Inequality andConsumption” (2014), available at http://www.morganstanleyfa.com/public/projectfiles/02386f9f-409c-4cc9-bc6b-13574637ec1d.pdf.

54 Van de Water and Huang, “Budget and Tax Plans ShouldNot Rely on ‘Dynamic Scoring’.”

55 The Bottom Line, “The House’s New Rule on DynamicScoring,” January 8, 2015, available at http://crfb.org/blogs/houses-new-rule-dynamic-scoring.

56 Lynch, “The benefits and drawbacks of using dynamicscoring in th e federal budget.”

57 Stein and Madowitz, “How the Ryan Budget Fails Our

Economy By Failing Economics”; Piketty and Saez, “TopIncomes and the Great Recession.”

58 Boushey and Price, “How Are Economic Inequality andGrowth Connected?”

59 Stein and Madowitz, “How the Ryan Budget Fails OurEconomy By Failing Economics”; Piketty and Saez, “TopIncomes and the Great Recession.”

60 Karen E. Dynan, Jonathan Skinner, and Stephen P.Zeldes, “Do The R ich Save More?”, Journal of PoliticalEconomy , 112 (2) (2004): 397–444, available at https://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/documents/DynanKEDotheRich.pdf .

61 Samuel Brown, William G. Gale, and Adam Looney, “The Tax Policy Center’s Analysis of Governor Romney’s TaxProposals: A Follow-up Discussion” (Washington:

Brookings Institution, 2012), available at http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2012/11/07-romney-tax-followup-brown-gale-looney.

62 Faler, “House adopts new math rules to boost tax cuts.”

http://realprosperityks.com/fool-kansans-100000-new-jobs-promise-doesnt-stack-current-growth/http://realprosperityks.com/fool-kansans-100000-new-jobs-promise-doesnt-stack-current-growth/http://realprosperityks.com/fool-kansans-100000-new-jobs-promise-doesnt-stack-current-growth/http://www.kslegresearch.org/SGF/2014_SGF_June_Receipts.pdfhttp://www.kslegresearch.org/SGF/2014_SGF_June_Receipts.pdfhttp://www.offthechartsblog.org/a-deserved-downgrade-of-kansas-bonds/http://www.offthechartsblog.org/a-deserved-downgrade-of-kansas-bonds/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/06/kansas-bond-rating-downgraded-after-tax-cuts/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/06/kansas-bond-rating-downgraded-after-tax-cuts/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/06/kansas-bond-rating-downgraded-after-tax-cuts/http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3756http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3756http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/projects/debt/1993reconciliationact.htmlhttp://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/projects/debt/1993reconciliationact.htmlhttp://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/08/10/173450/1993-quotes/http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/08/10/173450/1993-quotes/https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49440http://ms.techprogress.org/ms-content/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/100914-ineq-growth.pdfhttp://ms.techprogress.org/ms-content/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/100914-ineq-growth.pdfhttp://ms.techprogress.org/ms-content/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/100914-ineq-growth.pdfhttp://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-6963http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-6963https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2011/sdn1108.pdfhttps://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2011/sdn1108.pdfhttp://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdfhttp://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdfhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.morganstanleyfa.com/public/projectfiles/02386f9f-409c-4cc9-bc6b-13574637ec1d.pdfhttp://www.morganstanleyfa.com/public/projectfiles/02386f9f-409c-4cc9-bc6b-13574637ec1d.pdfhttp://www.morganstanleyfa.com/public/projectfiles/02386f9f-409c-4cc9-bc6b-13574637ec1d.pdfhttp://crfb.org/blogs/houses-new-rule-dynamic-scoringhttp://crfb.org/blogs/houses-new-rule-dynamic-scoringhttps://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/documents/DynanKEDotheRich.pdfhttps://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/documents/DynanKEDotheRich.pdfhttps://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/documents/DynanKEDotheRich.pdfhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2012/11/07-romney-tax-followup-brown-gale-looneyhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2012/11/07-romney-tax-followup-brown-gale-looneyhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2012/11/07-romney-tax-followup-brown-gale-looneyhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2012/11/07-romney-tax-followup-brown-gale-looneyhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2012/11/07-romney-tax-followup-brown-gale-looneyhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2012/11/07-romney-tax-followup-brown-gale-looneyhttps://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/documents/DynanKEDotheRich.pdfhttps://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/documents/DynanKEDotheRich.pdfhttps://www.dartmouth.edu/~jskinner/documents/DynanKEDotheRich.pdfhttp://crfb.org/blogs/houses-new-rule-dynamic-scoringhttp://crfb.org/blogs/houses-new-rule-dynamic-scoringhttp://www.morganstanleyfa.com/public/projectfiles/02386f9f-409c-4cc9-bc6b-13574637ec1d.pdfhttp://www.morganstanleyfa.com/public/projectfiles/02386f9f-409c-4cc9-bc6b-13574637ec1d.pdfhttp://www.morganstanleyfa.com/public/projectfiles/02386f9f-409c-4cc9-bc6b-13574637ec1d.pdfhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/trends-in-income-inequality-and-its-impact-on-economic-growth_5jxrjncwxv6j-enhttp://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdfhttp://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdfhttps://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2011/sdn1108.pdfhttps://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2011/sdn1108.pdfhttp://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-6963http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-6963http://ms.techprogress.org/ms-content/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/100914-ineq-growth.pdfhttp://ms.techprogress.org/ms-content/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/100914-ineq-growth.pdfhttp://ms.techprogress.org/ms-content/uploads/sites/10/2014/10/100914-ineq-growth.pdfhttps://www.cbo.gov/publication/49440http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/08/10/173450/1993-quotes/http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2010/08/10/173450/1993-quotes/http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/projects/debt/1993reconciliationact.htmlhttp://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/projects/debt/1993reconciliationact.htmlhttp://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3756http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3756http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/06/kansas-bond-rating-downgraded-after-tax-cuts/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/06/kansas-bond-rating-downgraded-after-tax-cuts/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/08/06/kansas-bond-rating-downgraded-after-tax-cuts/http://www.offthechartsblog.org/a-deserved-downgrade-of-kansas-bonds/http://www.offthechartsblog.org/a-deserved-downgrade-of-kansas-bonds/http://www.kslegresearch.org/SGF/2014_SGF_June_Receipts.pdfhttp://www.kslegresearch.org/SGF/2014_SGF_June_Receipts.pdfhttp://realprosperityks.com/fool-kansans-100000-new-jobs-promise-doesnt-stack-current-growth/http://realprosperityks.com/fool-kansans-100000-new-jobs-promise-doesnt-stack-current-growth/http://realprosperityks.com/fool-kansans-100000-new-jobs-promise-doesnt-stack-current-growth/


20/20

The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute

dedicated to promoting a strong, just, and free America that ensures opportunity

for all. We believe that Americans are bound together by a common commitment to

these values and we aspire to ensure that our national policies reflect these values.

We work to find progressive and pragmatic solutions to significant domestic and

international problems and develop policy proposals that foster a government that

is “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Considerations in Dynamic Scoring and Macroeconomic Modeling

Documents

Transcript of Considerations in Dynamic Scoring and Macroeconomic Modeling