Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Averting a Fiscal Crisis Why America Needs Comprehensive Fiscal Reforms Now Deficit Projections (Percent of GDP) 12% 10% 1992-2012 Average Deficit: 2.9% 2012-2022 Average Current Policy Deficit: 4.3% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% Note: Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 1 Gap Between Revenue and Spending (Percent of GDP) 26% Actual Projected 24% 22% Avg. Historical Spending (1972-2011): 21.0% 20% 18% 16% 14% Avg. Historical Revenues (1972-2011): 17.9% 12% 10% 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Current Law Spending CRFB Realistic Spending Note: Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 2 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 Current Law Revenues CRFB Realistic Revenues 2022 Surpluses Turning Into Growing Deficits… Spending and Revenues (Billions of Dollars) $860B Interest Deficit $220B Surplus Interest Deficit $1.1T What Debt Is Likely toPrimary Reach $5.1T $236B $233B $1.6T Revenues Primary Spending Spending $3.3T Interest $2.0T Revenues Primary Spending 2000 $2.4T Revenues 2012 Interest Costs Will Reach $1 Trillion By 2024 Source: Congressional Budget Office, Alternative Fiscal Scenario 3 $1.4T 2022 $4.6T Components of Revenue and Spending Revenues and Financing Outlays Interest 6% Borrowing 32% Individual Income Tax 27% Corporate Tax 5% Other 6% Social Insurance Taxes 24% Total Revenues = $2.435 Trillion Total Financing = $3.563 Trillion 4 Medicare 14% Non-Defense 15% Medicaid & Other Health 8% 2012 Social Security 22% Defense 19% Other Mandatory 16% Total Outlays = $3.563 Trillion Debt Projections (Percent of GDP) 400% 350% 300% 250% Realistic Projections 2010: 63% 2025: 88% 2040: 140% 2080: 365% 200% 150% What the Debt Will Realistically Look Like 100% 50% 0% -50% Note: Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 5 Current Law Growth in Mandatory Spending (Percent of GDP) 25% Actual Projected 20% Historical Average 15% 10% 5% 0% 1972 1982 1992 2002 2012 2022 2032 2042 2052 2062 2072 2082 Social Security 6 Health Care Other Entitlements Revenue Consequences of Debt “Crowding Out” of private sector investment, leading to slower economic growth Higher Interest Payments displacing other government priorities and investments Intergenerational Inequity as future generations pay for current government spending Unsustainable Promises of high spending and low taxes Uncertain Environment for businesses to invest and households to plan Eventual Fiscal Crisis if changes are not made 7 The Risk of Fiscal Crisis “Rising Debt increases the likelihood of a fiscal crisis during which investors would lose confidence in the government's ability to manage its budget and the government would lose its ability to borrow at affordable rates. -Doug Elmendorf, Director of the Congressional Budget Office “Our national debt is our biggest national security threat.” -Admiral Mike Mullen (ret.), Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff “One way or another, fiscal adjustments to stabilize the federal budget must occur … [if we don’t act in advance] the needed fiscal adjustments will be a rapid and painful response to a looming or actual fiscal crisis.” -Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve 8 Debt Drivers Short-Term Economic Crisis (lost revenue and increased spending on safety net programs like Food Stamps) Economic Response (stimulus spending/tax breaks and financial sector rescue policies) Tax Cuts (in 2001, 2003, and 2010) War Spending (in Iraq and Afghanistan) 9 Long-Term Rapid Health Care Cost Growth (causing Medicare and Medicaid costs to rise) Population Aging (causing Social Security and Medicare costs to rise, and revenues to fall) What the Debt Will Growing Interest Costs Realistically Look Like (from continued debt accumulation) Insufficient Revenue (to meet the costs of funding government) How Did We Get Here? Drivers of the Debt Since 2001 Increases in Debt: Technical & Economic Changes: 27% Tax Cuts: 27% Spending Increases: 41% Other Means of Financing: 6% Note: Estimates from The Pew Charitable Trusts based on CBO data. 10 Growing Entitlement Spending Federal Spending and Revenues (Percent of GDP) 50% Actual 45% 40% 35% 30% Average Historical Revenues Projected Interest Revenues 25% 20% 15% 10% Social Security 5% Other Spending 0% Note: Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 11 Health Care Why Is Entitlement Spending Growing? Drivers of Entitlement Spending Growth (Percent of GDP) 26% 24% 22% 20% 56% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% Source: CBO Long-term Budget Outlook, 2011. 12 36% 64% Excess Health Care Cost Growth Aging 44% Why Is Federal Health Spending Increasing? The Population Is Aging due to increased life expectancy and retirement of the baby boom generation, adding more beneficiaries to Medicare and Medicaid Per Beneficiary Costs Are Growing faster than the economy in both the public and private sector. Causes of this excess cost growth include: Americans Are Unhealthy when compared to populations in similar economies Americans Are Wealthy and Willing to Pay More Fragmentation and Complexity among insurers, providers, and consumers make normal market competition difficult Incentives Are Backwards by hiding true costs of care through insurance and by hiding costs of insurance enrollment through employer sponsorship, incentivizing overspending 13 Health Care Spending by Country Percent of GDP (2008) 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 36% 2% 0% 64% Public Private Source: 2008 Data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 14 Number of Workers for Every Social Security Retiree is Falling 1950 1960 2012 2035 36% 16:1 5:1 Source: 2012 Social Security Trustees Report. 15 64% 3:1 2:1 Living Longer, Retiring Earlier 90 85 80 Average Age of Retirement 75 Normal Retirement Age 70 65 60 55 50 Early Retirement Age Life Expectancy 45 40 Source: Social Security Administration and U.S. Census Bureau. 16 Looming Social Security Insolvency Social Security Costs and Revenues (Percent of Taxable Payroll) Scheduled Benefits 20% Payable Benefits 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% Source: 2011 Social Security Trustees Report. 17 Revenues Interest as a Share of the Budget (Percent of GDP) 2010 Primary Spending 94% 2030 Primary Spending 82% Interest 6% Total Spending = 24% of GDP Interest 18% Total Spending = 27% of GDP Note: Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Projections. 18 2050 Primary Spending 74% Interest 26% Total Spending = 34% of GDP Insufficient Revenue Unpaid for Tax Cuts in 2001, 2003, and 2010 lowered revenue collection without making corresponding spending cuts or tax increases to offset the budgetary effect Spending in the Tax Code Costs Over $1 Trillion annually in lost revenues through so called "tax expenditures," which make the tax code more complicated, less efficient, and force higher rates 19 Excessive Spending Through the Tax Code (Tax Expenditures) TaxIn Expenditures as a Percent Large Tax Expenditures order to stabilize DebtofatPrimary 60% of the economy by 2021: Spending if Included in the Budget and Their 2011 Costs (billions) Employer Health Insurance Exclusion Defense Discretionary 16% Tax Expenditures 24% Non-Defense Discretionary 15% Health Spending 17% Social Secutity 16% Other Mandatory 12% Source: Joint Committee on Taxation. Source: Office of Management and Budget. 20 $174 Mortgage Interest Deduction $89 401(k)s and IRAs $77 Earned Income Tax Credit $62 Special Rates for Capital Gains and Dividends $61 State & Local Tax Deduction $57 Charitable Deduction $49 Child Tax Credit $45 How Much Do We Need to Save? In order to stabilize debt at 60% of the economy by 2022: (2012-2022 Savings) Current Policy Current Policy Current Law Baseline Assuming Baseline Assuming Baseline Assuming Upper-Income Tax All Tax Cuts No Trigger Savings Cuts Expire* Continued* Debt in 2022 w/ No Savings (% GDP) 63% 77% 81% Required Savings to Stabilize Debt at 60% $0.8 Trillion $4.2 Trillion $5.3 Trillion *Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 21 How Much Do We Need to Save? (cont’d) In order to stabilize debt at 65% of the economy by 2022: (2012-2022 Savings) Current Policy Current Policy Current Law Baseline Assuming Baseline Assuming Baseline Assuming Upper-Income Tax All Tax Cuts No Trigger Savings Cuts Expire* Continued* Debt in 2022 w/ No Savings (% GDP) 63% 77% 81% Required Savings to Stabilize Debt at 65% $0.7 Trillion $3.0 Trillion $4.1 Trillion *Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 22 How Much Do We Need to Save? (cont’d) In order to stabilize debt at 70% of the economy by 2022: (2012-2022 Savings. Negative numbers reflect increase in deficits.) Current Policy Current Policy Current Law Baseline Assuming Baseline Assuming Baseline Assuming Upper-Income Tax All Tax Cuts No Trigger Savings Cuts Expire* Continued* Debt in 2022 w/ No Savings (% GDP) 63% 77% 81% Required Savings to Stabilize Debt at 70% -$0.6 Trillion $1.7 Trillion $2.8 Trillion *Estimates based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 23 How Much Do We Need to Save? (cont’d) So even if lawmakers were to stabilize debt at 70% of the economy in 2022—a level higher than the internationally recognized threshold of 60%—they would have to enact at least $2.8 trillion in savings beyond the $920 billion enacted in the Budget Control Act, compared to realistic assumptions of future debt. That calls for a Go Big approach to debt reduction. 24 We Can’t Inflate or Grow Our Way Out Inflation An unexpected increase in inflation could temporarily reduce the real value of debt and federal interest payments to investors However, higher inflation would prompt investors to demand higher interest payments, increasing the costs of financing new debt Higher inflation would also push up spending for all inflation-indexed programs, including Social Security, food stamps, military pensions, veterans’ benefits. Growth Strong economic growth is a necessary but not sufficient condition for debt reduction Many spending programs grow as the economy does, and would outpace revenue growth Social Security payments would increase as wages and, thus, benefits grew over time Health care spending would grow even faster, given that costs continually grow notably faster than the overall economy The levels of growth needed to significantly reduce medium-term debts would be way above historical norms 25 Debt Reduction and Economic Growth Real Output Growth (Percent) 4.0% 3.5% CBO studied the economic impact of an illustrative $2.4 trillion debt reduction plan and found that real output would be between 0.6% and 1.4% higher, depending on the magnitude of the effects. 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 CBO Baseline Growth Medium Output Effect Small Output Effect Large Output Effect *Estimates from CBO, “The Macroeconomic and Budgetary Effects of an Illustrative Policy for Reducing the Federal Budget Deficit.” 26 How to Reduce the Deficit Domestic Discretionary Cuts Defense Spending Cuts Health Care Cost Containment Social Security Reform Other Spending Cuts Tax Reform and Tax Expenditure Cuts Budget Process Reform 27 “Go Small”: Lots of Pain for Little Gain A smaller package would offer some improvement to our fiscal situation, but it would not offer the benefits of a declining debt path The public would see a package of tough choices and a debt burden that continues to grow. In essence, it would deliver political pain with not so much gain Would leave in place considerable policy uncertainty, affecting businesses and markets A smaller package and an incremental approach to debt reduction would not offer the political tradeoffs necessary to solve our fiscal challenges 28 What Could “Go Small” Look Like? Possible Policy Changes Savings Government-Wide $250 billion from chained CPI Social Security $100-200 billion from modestly slower growth in BCA caps Negligible savings $150-250 billion from farm subsidies, federal civilian and military retirement and benefits, Fannie and Freddie, and others Negligible savings Revenues Negligible savings Net Interest Total $100 billion $600-800 billion Discretionary Health Care Other Mandatory 29 Without addressing health care reforms or revenues, it will be very difficult to achieve significant savings And even then, there is no guarantee that significant savings in other areas of the budget could be agreed on Adding Serious Entitlement Reforms and Revenues Pushes You into “Go Big” Democrats will only agree to serious entitlement reforms if there are revenues Republicans will only agree to revenues in the context of comprehensive tax reform Democrats will only agree to a comprehensive tax reform that replaces the Bush tax cuts if it raises at least the $800 billion they would get if President Obama vetoes extension of upper income tax cuts Republicans will not agree to revenues anywhere near that amount without health savings that go beyond the amount proposed by the President 30 Advantages of “Go Big” Debt stabilized and falling as a share of the economy later in the decade, and all the benefits associated with a declining debt burden: Less “crowding out” of private sector 31 investment Stronger confidence in businesses and markets Greater certainty and stability Stronger economy over the long-term Lower interest payments and increased fiscal space Intergenerational equity Reduced or eliminated risk of fiscal crisis Advantages of “Go Big” (cont’d) Increased chances of enacting a comprehensive debt solution of at least $3 - $4 trillion in savings: Political trade offs necessary to address entitlement growth and revenues Shared sacrifice in Go Big approach Realize the gains of debt reduction by stabilizing and reducing the debt, and not just making difficult decisions that solve only part of the problem Restore America’s faith in the political system 32 The Announcement Effect Just announcing the adoption of a debt reduction plan can provide a boost in confidence, aiding the recovery Prominent lawmakers, government officials, economists, and experts have reiterated the benefits of the announcement effect, including: 33 Ben Bernanke, Fed Chairman Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson The International Monetary Fund Glenn Hubbard, former Chair of the President’s CEA Mark Zandi, Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York City Alan Blinder, former Fed Vice Chairman Larry Summers, former Director, NEC Various editorial boards and magazines, including the Washington Post, Financial Times, and The Economist Note: For more information on the “announcement effect,” see CRFB at http://crfb.org/blogs/announcing-announcement-effect-club “Go Big”: Shared Sacrifice Expanding the size and scope of a package can promote a sense of shared sacrifice on behalf of the American public and key interest groups, making it more likely that they would accept changes if everyone was contributing to the solution. An incremental approach would allow advocates for parts of the budget to argue that they are bearing an unfair burden. A Go Big approach which achieves savings in all parts of the budget neutralizes that argument. In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Fiscal Commission co-chairs Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson highlighted this lesson from the Fiscal Commission deliberations: “The more comprehensive we made it, the easier our job became. The tougher our proposal, the more people came aboard. Commission members were willing to take on their sacred cows and fight special interests — but only if they saw others doing the same and if what they were voting for solved the country’s problems.” 34 What Could “Go Really Big” Look Like? Including serious entitlement reforms and revenues pushes the overall savings well above the $1.2 trillion mandate 35 Possible Policy Changes Government-Wide $600 - $800 Billion Plan $250 billion Discretionary $3 Trillion Plan $4 Trillion Plan $250 billion $250 billion $100- 200 billion $300 billion $400 billion Health Care Negligible savings $650 billion $900 billion Other Mandatory $150 - $250 billion $350 billion $350 billion Social Security Negligible savings $150 billion $300 billion Revenues Negligible savings $850 billion $1.2 trillion Net Interest Total $100 billion $600 - $800 billion $450 billion $3 trillion $600 billion $4 trillion Note: $4 trillion plan is a more ambitious version of the types of reforms in the $2.8 trillion plan. The Bowles-Simpson Fiscal Commission Plan Discretionary Spending Cuts to defense and non-defense programs, totaling an additional $400 billion over ten years [on top of the savings already enacted]. Social Security Progressive benefit changes, retirement age increase, tax increase for high earners totaling $300 billion. Health Care Spending Cuts to providers, lawyers, drug companies, & beneficiaries totaling $400 billion. Other Mandatory Programs Reforms to farm, civilian/military retirement, & other programs saving $290 billion. Tax Reform and Revenue Comprehensive reform to lower tax rates, broaden the base, and raise $1.2 trillion. 36 The Bowles-Simpson Fiscal Commission Plan (Deficits as Percent of GDP) 10% 18% 9% 16% 8% 14% 7% 12% 6% 10% 5% 8% 4% 6% 3% 2% 4% 1% 2% 0% 0% Plausible Baseline 37 Commission Plan Illustrative Tax Rates 2012 Rates, Expiration of the Tax Cuts, and Fiscal Commission’s Illustrative Plan Bottom Rates Current Rates for 2012 Scheduled Rates for 2013 Eliminate All Tax Expenditures Keep Child Tax Credit and EITC Fiscal Commission’s Illustrative Tax Plan 10% 15% 15% Middle Rates Top Rates Corporate Rate 25% 28% 33% 35% 35% 28% 31% 36% 39.6% 35% 8% 14% 23% 26% 9% 15% 24% 26% 12% 22% 28% 28% Fiscal Commission’s illustrative tax plan would reduce or eliminate most tax expenditures and use the savings to reduce tax rates and reduce the deficit. 38 What’s in the Fiscal Cliff? At the end of 2012, the following is scheduled to occur: All of the 2001/2003/2010 tax cuts will expire at once The “sequester” will immediately cut defense by 10%, non-defense 39 discretionary by 8%, and other spending across-the-board The payroll tax holiday and extended unemployment benefits will expire The AMT will hit 30 million taxpayers instead of 4 million All the tax extenders will expire Physicians will see a 30% cut in their Medicare payments Tax increases from the Affordable Care Act will begin The country will once again hit the debt celling Components of the Fiscal Cliff The Sequester Enacted in the 2011 BCA to pressure the Super Committee to enact a plan, the sequester would cut spending across the board in January 2013. % Reduction in 2013 (Budget Authority) 2012-2022 Cuts (Budget Authority) Defense Spending 10% $550 billion Non-Defense Disc. Spending 8% $360 billion Medicare 2% $125 billion Other Non-Exempt Spending 8% $45 billion Interest N/A $170 billion +$100 billion $1,250 billion Total Cuts Source: Congressional Budget Office. Numbers are rounded. 40 Components of the Fiscal Cliff Other Policies Set to Activate or Expire Jobs Measures 2% payroll tax holiday Extended duration for unemployment benefits Annual Doc Fixes Affordable Care Act Tax Increases 0.9% increase in HI tax for higher earners and applying the full 3.8% tax to net investment income 2.3% tax on medical devices Other measures Various “Tax Extenders” 41 R&E tax credit Alcohol fuel tax credit Subpart F for active financing income Other extenders How Big Is the Fiscal Cliff? Policy 2013 Fiscal Impact 2013-2022 Fiscal Impact 2001/2003/2010 Income and Estate Tax Cuts $110 billion $4.3trillion AMT Patches (w/ Tax Cut Interactions) $105 billion $1.7 trillion Sequester $55 billion $1.1 trillion Doc Fixes $10 billion $280 billion Jobs Measures $115 billion $150 billion Various “Tax Extenders” $30 billion $455 billion Taxes from the Affordable Care Act $25 billion $420 billion ~$450 billion $8.1 trillion ~3% N/A Total Fiscal Impact Total Economic Impact (% GDP) Note: Congressional Budget Office estimates and CRFB calculations. 2013-2022 estimates include interest. 42 Budgetary and Economic Impact Billions of Dollars 36% 64% Source: Congressional Budget Office estimates and rough CRFB calculations. 43 Short-Term Economic Impact of the Fiscal Cliff Expiring/activating measures will create a “fiscal shock” of about 4 percent of GDP, which could take about 2 percent out of the economy in the short-term and increase unemployment by over 1 percent Under current law, CBO projects negative growth in the first quarter of 2013 and negligible growth in the second quarter Current Law vs. Current Policy 2013 2022 Difference in Real GDP Level -2.1% +1.0% Difference in Real GDP Growth (Q4 to Q4) -1.6% +0.2% Difference in Unemployment Rate +1.1% n/a Source: Congressional Budget Office. 44 Long-Term Economic Impact of the Fiscal Cliff The Fiscal Cliff could improve the long-term, BUT: Savings in the Fiscal Cliff will not deal with the long-term debt drivers – growing health and retirement costs Revenue will come largely from higher marginal rates, which will reduce incentives to work, save, and invest Spending cuts will come from mindless across-the-board cuts instead of cuts to low-priority and anti-growth spending 45 Lawmakers Face a Fiscal Cliff and a Mountain of Debt WORST CASE: A Mountain of Debt If lawmakers waive or extend policies at the end of the year, they could add more than $7.5 trillion to the debt over the next ten years, compared to current law. BAD CASE: A Fiscal Cliff If lawmakers allow all policy expirations and the sequester to proceed as scheduled, the economy could take a 2 percent hit over 2013-2014, while not addressing entitlement spending growth or fundamental tax reform. 46 Is There a Smart Path Forward? Instead of a Fiscal Cliff or Mountain of Debt, we should enact a comprehensive and thoughtful plan which would: Go Big A plan must stabilize and reduce the debt relative to the economy A go big plan would make bipartisan compromise more likely by allowing for the necessary tradeoffs Go Smart Replace mindless, abrupt deficit reduction with thoughtful changes that reform the tax code and cut low-priority spending Go Long Enact gradual reforms that address the long-term costs of growing entitlement spending 47 Is There a Smart Path Forward? Deficit Projections as a Percent of GDP 10% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 CBO Alternative Fiscal Scenario Note: Illustrative plan loosely based on Fiscal Commission savings. Current policy based on CRFB Realistic Baseline. 48 2016 2017 2018 CBO Current Law 2019 2020 2021 Illustrative Plan 2022 Benefits of Replacing the Fiscal Cliff with a Go Big Plan Achieves long-term growth without short-term contraction Avoids both a double-dip recession and a potential downgrade from credit rating agencies Allows for sensible policy decisions to make the tax code more competitive, reform entitlement programs, and eliminate wasteful spending Reduces market and public uncertainty over future tax and spending policies 49 What Savings Have Lawmakers Enacted So Far? (Billions of Dollars through 2021) $2,000 Simpson-Bowles Recommendations $1,500 $1,000 $500 $0 Note: Estimates based on realistic budget projections. 50 Enacted Savings What Would the President and Governor Romney Do? Debt Projections (Percent of GDP) 100% 90% Romney w/o credit for unspecified base broadening 80% 70% 60% 50% Current Policy 40% Romney 30% Obama 20% 10% 0% 2012 Note: Estimates based on CBO and CRFB calculations. 51 2016 2021 It’s Time for a Fiscal Reform Plan Reasons to Enact a Plan Sooner Rather than Later Allows for gradual phase in Improves generational fairness Gives taxpayers businesses, and entitlement beneficiaries time to plan Creates “announcement effect” to improve growth Reduces size of necessary adjustment Source: Congressional Budget Office 52 Size of Adjustment to Close 25-year Fiscal Gap, Depending on Start Year (Percent of GDP) 2013 4.8% 2015 5.2% 2020 6.8% 2025 9.7% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% It’s Time for a Fiscal Reform Plan…Now We Can’t Wait Until After the Election Every month and year that passes, the debt grows larger and larger and the solutions become more difficult Elections can take policy options off the table and back candidates into positions that make bipartisan solutions more difficult Addressing the fiscal situation as soon as possible would make governing easier – not harder – after the election 53 Who Supports “Go Big”? Calls for a $4+ Trillion, Bipartisan Solution to the Debt 45 Members of the Senate 102 Members of the House of Representatives 200 Business Groups, including the Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, and Business Roundtable Other groups: Partnership for New York City, American Business Conference, National Conference of State Legislatures 60+ former government officials, business leaders, and experts Editorial boards and other outside experts Countless concerned citizens 54 Principles of Fiscal Responsibility For the 2012 Campaign 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 55 Make Deficit Reduction a Top Priority Propose Specific Fiscal Targets Recommend Specific Policies to Achieve the Targets Do No Harm Use Honest Numbers and Avoid Budget Gimmicks Do Not Perpetuate Budget Myths Do Not Attack Someone Else’s Plan Without Putting Forward an Alternative Refrain from Pledges That Take Policies Off the Table Propose Specific Solution for Social Security, Health Programs, and the Tax Code Offer Solutions for Temporary and Expiring Policies Encourage Congress to Come Up with a Budget Plan as Quickly as Possible Remain Open to Bipartisan Compromise The Time For Action Is Now “If not addressed, burgeoning deficits will eventually lead to a fiscal crisis, at which point the bond markets will force decisions upon us. If we do not act soon to reassure the markets, the risk of a crisis will increase, and the options available to avert or remedy the crisis will both narrow and become more stringent.” -Erskine Bowles and Sen. Alan Simpson, Former co-chairs of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform 56 Current Bipartisan Efforts Fix the Debt The Fix the Debt Campaign 100+ Members of the House of Representatives 45+ Senators Hundreds of business leaders, associations, and other experts calling for a broad, bipartisan plan to stabilize and reduce debt Thousands of concerned citizens 57 Useful Resources The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget http://crfb.org http://www.fixthedebt.org Policy Papers: Between a Mountain of Debt and a Fiscal Cliff Primary Numbers: The GOP Candidates Going Big Could Improve the Chances of Success Slideshow on Our Fiscal Challenges: Averting a Fiscal Crisis Congressional Budget Office July 16, 2011 report: The Macroeconomic and Budgetary Effects of an Illustrative Policy for Reducing the Federal Budget Deficit 58