Hearing of the House Budget Committee - Congressional Budget Office Oversight Hearing

Hearing

Today Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, made opening remarks at the House Budget Committee hearing on oversight of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Below is a transcript of his remarks:

"Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me start by joining you in welcoming Director Hall to your first House Budget Committee hearing. Welcome, Dr. Hall. And as you well know, the agency that you head, the Congressional Budget Office, has a well-earned reputation as a non-biased source of information for the Congress and the public. Its credibility has been based on the fact that Members of Congress see it as an independent, professional, non-partisan arbitrator analysis of important questions. And I would like to just put in the record, Mr. Chairman, a letter that the first Director of the Congressional Budget Office, Alice Rivlin, wrote describing the importance of maintaining that nonpartisan tradition.

"Director Hall, I know you know you're the caretaker now of that independent, nonpartisan tradition, and we look forward to working with you. I think it's going to be particularly important given the fact that Congress has now directed the Congressional Budget Office to engage in what is commonly referred to as dynamic scoring. And there are lots of concerns about how games can be played with dynamic scoring. We saw in an analysis that was released of the former Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee Mr. Camp's tax proposal how those games can be played. The Joint Tax Committee did a whole number of analyses of the potential dynamic effect of that proposal. And, not surprisingly, in all his public presentations, the Chairman of the Committee used the one that showed the most aggressive benefits in terms of economic growth and revenues. But in fact, that was not a conclusion that had been reached by the Joint Tax Committee. So as you embark in this area, just understand -- and I know you do -- that it's happening in a political context of a lot of suspicion about abuse of that particular approach.

"The Chairman opened with some comments about the state of the economy. And I would just point out that according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's analysis of the Republican budget, at least over the next couple years, it would actually create a contraction in the economy. It would generally reduce total demand for goods and services. And so I believe, as I think all of us do, that we need to keep the economy on the right track -- and that means not taking actions through the budget process and through Congress that would actually slow down economic output at this particular time, which is what the Congressional Budget Office concluded the Republican budget would do.

"We're also gathered here at a time when we're looking at a lot of appropriations bills coming to the floor of the House. And I think it's important to remind Members that each of these bills is based on a huge accounting gimmick, which this Committee, on a bipartisan basis, has rejected in the past. And I just do think it's worth reminding my colleagues of what the Republican budget report from fiscal year 2015 said about using the so-called OCO funds -- the Overseas Contingency Operations fund, the war savings fund -- as a slush fund to try to get around the budget caps. And here's what the Republican Budget Committee wrote a year ago about using OCO in that way: Abuse of the OCO cap adjustment is a backdoor loophole that undermines the integrity of the budget process. The Budget Committee will exercise its oversight responsibilities with respect to the use of the OCO designation in the fiscal year 2015 budget process and it will oppose increases above the levels the administration and our military commanders say are needed to carry out the operations.

"So, that was the Republican Budget Committee report from a year ago. Apparently they've torn it up, thrown it out the window, and are using OCO for precisely the purposes that they said a year ago would undermine the integrity of the budget process. And I do want to read a letter that was written just the other day to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Appropriations Committee from OMB, the Director of OMB, where he points out, and I quote, "as the Secretary,' -- we're referring to the Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter -- "as the Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have repeatedly stated, funding enduring operations through OCO is harmful both to military planning and to servicemember morale. Secretary Ash Carter has called this approach "managerially unsound, and also unfairly dispiriting to our force.''

"I hope in the coming weeks we will put an end to this budget gamesmanship and approach the budget in a serious way.

"The President has approached it in a serious way, Mr. Chairman. He said that we need to invest both in additional defense and national security, but we also need to invest in scientific research, in education -- and he proposed to address this issue in a straightforward manner, increasing each by about $38 billion. Unfortunately, the Congress chose to take a backdoor path, backdoor by the testimony of our Republican colleagues, and that has put us in the situation where we're now, kind of paddling down this river serenely when we all know there's this huge waterfall ahead. And if our Republican colleagues want to keep quietly paddling toward a government shutdown, that's their choice. But we hope they will join with us in preventing that from happening. So thank you, Mr. Chairman -- I think we all know that's what's happening in this appropriations process. It's kind of a meaningless exercise. The President has been very clear, he's not going to support any budget bills, appropriations bills, based on this OCO gamesmanship. And so, we hope we can get beyond that in the near future and get on with the business of the country.

"Thank you."

Source