Doug Elmendorf, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, warned the newly formed deficit reduction committee Tuesday that if it elects to cut spending or raise taxes too quickly, the still struggling economy could be slowed even further.
Congress formed the so-called "super committee" to find at least $1.5 trillion in deficit reductions over the next 10 years in exchange for raising the debt ceiling this summer. Members are charged with finding either enough spending cuts, new revenues or a combination of both before triggering roughly $1.2 trillion in more immediate spending cuts if a deal is not reached by the end of the year.
The committee met Tuesday for the first time. While some on the committee stuck to preconceived stances such as refusing to raise taxes or cut certain entitlements, others urged members to find some common ground and make deep, long-term changes to reduce the $14.6 trillion in U.S. debt.
The timing, however, could prove tricky. Since early July, economic growth for the rest of 2011 will likely be weaker than previously anticipated. According to the CBO revision, growth may fall to roughly 1.5% this year and 2.5% in 2012.
"If economic growth occurs at the slow pace that CBO anticipates, a large portion of the economic and human costs of the recession and slow recovery remains ahead," Elmendorf said in testimony.
Between late 2007 and mid-2011, the difference between GDP and estimated potential GDP totaled roughly $2.5 trillion, Elmendorf said, adding that by the time the country's output rises back to its potential level, which may take several years, the shortfall could reach about $5 trillion.
"Not only are the costs associated with the output gap immense, but they are also borne unevenly, falling disproportionately on people who lose their jobs, who are displaced from their homes, or who own businesses that fail," Elmendorf said.
He said cutting spending or increasing taxes over time could lead to more growth in the debt, while more abrupt cuts or raises would give people, businesses and governments little time to adjust.
"In addition, and particularly important given the cur- rent state of the economy, immediate spending cuts or tax increases would represent an added drag on the weak economic expansion," Elmendorf said.
Elmendorf added: "In our analysis, to provide the greatest boost to the economy now would be to cut taxes or increase spending in the immediate term, then in longer term cut spending or increase taxes."
What wasn't up for debate during the committee hearing was the scale of the problem. In June 2011, the U.S. public debt was projected to reach 84% of GDP in 2035 under current law.
If provisions of the 2010 tax act are extended, then, in order to reduce the debt to 61% of GDP by 2021, the committee would have to find $6.2 trillion of deficit reduction over the next 10 years, Elmendorf said, not the $1.5 trillion targeted.
Write to Jon Prior.
Follow him on Twitter @JonAPrior.
The menu in the canteen at HousingWire lists a special breakfast offer. Now, for only $1.39 (plus tax), any member of our staff can get a full breakfast of one biscuit smothered in gravy.
This is very likely the largest indicator that I've seen that shows the economic recovery is likely to get worse before it gets better.
The notion that Americans need more bargains is nothing new.
As James Sweeney, an analyst for the global fixed income division of Credit Suisse (CS: 26.64 -0.26%) put it, "deleveraging has become a household word."
And now that it is a household world, we can expect an ongoing trend. Americans are going to continue to deleverage. The economy cannot be willed into gear via increased consumption simply because Americans have no choice but to spend less and less and less.
"Declining U.S. debt is a consequence of bad housing loans made from 2004 to 2007, not voluntary deleveraging," Sweeney said. "The situation is far from ubiquitous: The U.S. household sector as a whole can handle its debt. It might even be underleveraged."
Come again? Deleveraging Americans may be underleveraged?
What Sweeney suggests is a return to higher levels of borrowing for the next decade to serve as an economic stimulus.
It's a simple notion, but one Americans will be unwilling to capitalize upon.
For one, consider the negative headline risk facing the nation. The American head of credit research at Société Générale, Roger Horn, recently revised expectations for the nation's gross domestic product for the next two years.
GDP growth for 2011 is now forecast at 1.6%, down from Horn's team original estimate of 2.7%. SocGen also recently lowered its 2012 GDP growth forecast to 1.8% from 3.1%.
Not pretty.
Capital Economics counters the spend-to-recover argument easily in its outlook report for the U.S.
"Lower borrowing costs won't boost consumption much when the price of credit is not the problem," analysts at the Toronto-based firm said.
"Instead, the previous sharp fall in equity prices, the continued decline in house prices and the still high unemployment rate have significantly reduced the ability and willingness of households to borrow," according to Capital Economics.
What's missing is housing policy that appreciates why the average American wants to pay $1.39 cash for a biscuit and gravy breakfast, as opposed to putting it on a credit card. There is a clear lack of incentives for the public to do anything but retrench.
There are no caps on landlords raising rents. There appears to be little chance of a tax break. Contention over the debt ceiling created political risk for any further stimulus package. House prices edge lower, wages are soft, jobs growth nonexistent.
And as more regulations come into force, the lending environment for consumers is likely to grow even more restricted over the next years. There will be an end to the misery one day, to be sure.
But this day will come sooner if the markets are allowed to operate in a regulatory environment growing less restrictive, not more.
Did Dodd-Frank serve to extend economic hardships for Americans? We could answer that if anyone with political will in Washington will join us for a biscuit.
Write to Jacob Gaffney.
Follow him on Twitter @jacobgaffney.
Tags: Capital Economics, Credit Suisse, debt, GDP, jobs, mortgages, Société Générale
Posted in Commentary, Jacob Gaffney, Voices | No Comments »