Discussion about this post

User's avatar
dysphemistic treadmill's avatar

Odd that you two did not talk about the history of the prohibition on dynamic scoring.

As I understand it, Congress tied its own hands in order to avoid distorted and unrealistic boosterism ("monorail!") that would promise miracle growth from every tax-cut, or from every increase in immigration.

Republicans have spent the last 50 years lying about the economic benefits of tax-cuts for the wealthy ("trickle-down," "Laffer curve," etc.), so Democrats have a reason not to allow them to use "dynamic scoring" i.e. to make shit up. And Republicans are pretty sure that highly educated immigrants will vote Democratic, so they have a reason not to allow your proposal to be dynamically-scored.

Both sides suspect that it is just too easy to use this method to lie for partisan advantage when a party has captured the House. So they grudgingly forgo using it so as not to let the other side abuse it. What does your proposal do to change that underlying dynamic?

Expand full comment
Andrew's avatar

Like I feel like there’s an assume a can opener quality that’s untested here.

Can the cbo accurately predict these consequences to a level acceptable to everyone. Like one of the first things I learned about economics is unintended consequences are a real thing that plagues policy making immemorially. How confident are we that the cbo can predict the consequences of things in the economy if we let them try.

Like of course if they can this would be a good thing for them to do but I’m unsure if they can.

Expand full comment
80 more comments...

No posts