<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR vAlign=bottom>
<TD><A href="http://www.latimes.com/"><IMG height=38 alt=latimes.com
src="http://www.latimes.com/images/standard/lat_both.gif" width=205
vspace=3 border=0></A></TD>
<TD>
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/trb.latimes/news/print/asection;ptype=ps;slug=la-na-budget25jan25;rg=r;zc=83843;ref=latimescom;pos=printstory;dcopt=ist;sz=728x90;tile=1;ord=47084070?"
type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>
<NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<HR class=thick>
<DIV style="MARGIN-LEFT: 1em; MARGIN-RIGHT: 1em"><A
href="http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-budget25jan25,1,2108973.story?coll=la-news-a_section">http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-budget25jan25,1,2108973.story?coll=la-news-a_section</A><BR>
<H1>It's a balanced budget or tax cuts, report says</H1>
<DIV class=storysubhead><STRONG><FONT size=4>Bush probably can't achieve both by
2012, an analysis finds.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>By Joel Havemann<BR>Times Staff
Writer<BR><BR>January 25, 2007<BR><BR>WASHINGTON — President Bush can balance
the budget within five years, or he can get Congress to extend his tax cuts
beyond their scheduled expiration, the Congressional Budget Office reported
Wednesday — but probably not both. <BR><BR>Bush has said otherwise, committing
himself in Tuesday's State of the Union address, as he did earlier this month,
to providing Congress on Feb. 5 with spending and tax proposals for fiscal 2008
that would put the budget on a path toward balance by 2012.<BR><BR>"We must
balance the federal budget," Bush said Tuesday night. "We can do so without
raising taxes." <BR><BR>The nonpartisan CBO, in its annual report on where
current spending and tax policies would take the budget over the next 10 years,
did not contradict Bush in so many words. But its tables painted an unmistakable
picture of a budget that needed an extra infusion of cash or a sharp reduction
in outlays if revenue were ever to exceed spending.<BR><BR>And even if the
budget could be balanced by 2012, said Peter R. Orszag, the CBO's director, the
retirement of the baby-boom generation could quickly unbalance it: Not only
would the wave of retirees force the government to spend more for Social
Security, Medicare and other benefit programs, he said, but it would drain the
population of taxpaying wage-earners.<BR><BR>Republicans in Congress saw the
report as portraying a potentially bright budgetary future.<BR><BR>"Congress is
within reach of balancing the budget without raising taxes if significant
entitlement reforms are enacted within the next five years," said Rep. Paul D.
Ryan of Wisconsin, the top Republican on the House Budget Committee<BR><BR>Rep.
Roy Blunt of Missouri, who ranks second in the House GOP leadership, was more
enthusiastic. "Tax relief has spurred unprecedented economic growth," he said,
"and these results prove that we can balance our budget without raising taxes."
<BR><BR>To Democrats, the fiscal outlook was much gloomier. Senate Budget
Committee Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota said the CBO must base its
projections on current spending and tax law, without regard to likely changes.
And currently, he said, the Iraq war is underfunded — the administration is
expected soon to ask for an additional $100 billion for this year — and the tax
cuts that Bush wants made permanent are due to expire at the end of
2010.<BR><BR>When the budget office's projections are adjusted for these and
other factors, said Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.), chairman of the House
Budget Committee, the result is "a bleak reminder of how much current policy
will need to be changed to return the budget to a fiscally responsible
course."<BR><BR>Liberal and conservative budget analysts took the Democrats'
slant. Brian M. Riedl, lead budget specialist at the right-of-center Heritage
Foundation, said the new numbers implied that balancing the budget by 2012
without increasing taxes meant that federal spending could be $294 billion
greater in 2012 than 2007. But in that period, he noted, Social Security,
Medicare and Medicaid costs would rise by $367 billion.<BR><BR>Under current
law, if the tax cuts expire as scheduled at the end of 2010, the budget would
swing nearly to balance in 2011 and show a $170-billion surplus in 2012, the CBO
estimates.<BR><BR>But that would occur only if Congress allows the tax cuts to
expire. Such a decision — far from a forgone conclusion — would generate $268
billion in revenue in 2012. Without it, there would be a $100-billion
deficit.<BR><BR>The budget office said other likely tax actions — notably,
continued relief from the alternative minimum tax, which increasingly hits
middle-class taxpayers instead of just the very wealthy — would add $160 billion
more to the 2012 deficit.<BR><BR>On the spending side of the budget, substantial
troop reductions in Iraq could save $43 billion in 2012. But that could be more
than offset if Congress let domestic appropriations, which Bush has targeted for
no increase even for inflation, grow as fast as the combination of economic
output and inflation. Altogether, the policy changes identified by the CBO could
turn the 2012 surplus of $170 billion into a deficit of $245
billion.</DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>