Learning to love the sequester

Reuters

Sens. John McCain, R-AZ, Charles Schumer, D-NY, and Lindsey Graham, R-SC, sit in the House chamber prior to President Obama's State of the Union speech on Capitol Hill in Washington, Feb. 12, 2013.

Article Highlights

  • Congress can use the sequester to put U.S. fiscal policy back on a sustainable path

    Tweet This

  • The sequester is a minuscule reduction in spending, especially in view of the widely proclaimed need to cut the deficit.

    Tweet This

  • Congress, especially Republicans, should embrace the sequester.

    Tweet This

In his State of the Union address Tuesday, President Obama played on Congress's fears that an abrupt spending sequester at a rate of about $110 billion per year ($1.1 trillion over 10 years) scheduled to begin March 1 would devastate the economy. "These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts," warned Mr. Obama, would "slow our recovery and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs."

The sequester admittedly will produce short-term pain for those served by affected programs. But the impact will be limited. Cutting government spending by $110 billion per year would lower total federal spending, currently at about $3.6 trillion per year, by 3%. That is a modest reduction in spending, especially in view of the widely proclaimed need to cut the deficit.

Congress, especially Republicans, should embrace the sequester. While it represents only a modest, 10-year spending cut of $1.1 trillion—just 2.5% of projected total federal spending over that period—it still amounts to $2 of spending cuts for every dollar of the president's tax increases enacted on Jan. 2. That's not the 3:1 ratio recommended in December 2010 by the president's Simpson-Bowles deficit commission, but it's the best within reach now.

The sequester, along with the tax increases, would slow growth for a quarter or two, perhaps to 1%. But thereafter the slower growth in government debt levels and less uncertainty attached to fiscal policy would lead to greater private investment, increased economic growth and substantially reduced deficits.

What exactly does "substantially reduced" mean? The sequester and tax increases will reduce the primary deficit—that is, government spending minus tax revenues—by about $170 billion per year, thereby slowing the growth of the debt-to-GDP ratio by 1.4 percentage points per year. The growth in the debt-to-GDP ratio will be further slowed by the "interest gap," or the difference between the average interest rate on outstanding U.S. government debt and the growth rate of nominal GDP.

In short, we can count on a growth rate in the debt-to-GDP ratio that is 4.6 percentage points per year slower than it would have been without the sequester and tax increases. This benign outcome requires that government interest costs remain low and that nominal growth stays at about 4% (2% real growth and 2% inflation). These conditions, in turn, are more likely given the enhanced sustainability of deficits brought about by the sequester and tax increases. Moderate deficit reductions initiate a virtuous circle that makes further deficit reduction more likely.

The deficit-reduction measures already undertaken this year, provided that Congress maintains the sequester, will be recognized as substantial progress toward achieving a sustainable path for U.S. deficits and debt. With the tax increases and sequester in place, the Congressional Budget Office projects substantially reduced deficits, falling from the $1.09 trillion deficit in fiscal year 2012 to $845 billion in 2013 and thereafter falling steadily to $535 billion in 2017.

Given this projected decline in deficits, the debt-to-GDP ratio would peak at about 77% in the 2014 fiscal year that starts this October and fall steadily to about 73% by 2017. During the five years from 2018 through fiscal year 2022, the CBO estimates that the debt-to-GDP ratio will rise modestly from 73% to 76%. The actual outcome will likely be better since the CBO assumes that interest rates on 10-year Treasury notes will rise to 5.4% from today's 1.8%-1.95% range. But a more likely 4% yield on 10-year notes will slow growth in the debt-to-GDP ratio by 0.6 percentage points per year. The result will be a stable debt-to-GDP ratio over the next decade, even prior to entitlement reform.

In sum, by sticking to the sequester, Congress can assure some progress toward a sustainable fiscal policy. The major remaining challenges are to enact entitlement and tax reform.

There exist numerous proposals in Congress and elsewhere to moderate growth in outlays on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. A revenue-neutral tax reform that pays for lower marginal tax rates by closing loopholes would add half a percentage point to GDP growth over the coming five years, just when it is needed most to enhance the pace of reduction in the debt-to-GDP ratio.

Stabilizing the debt-to-GDP ratio just below current levels over the next decade and thereafter reducing it steadily back down to 60% or lower will pay substantial dividends. The uncertainty generated by unsustainable deficits will be reduced and investment in growth will accelerate.

Fear-mongering aside, the sequester is more paring knife than meat axe. Together with the tax increases enacted on Jan. 2 by the last Congress, the new Congress can use the sequester to put U.S. fiscal policy back on a sustainable path and then move on to finish the job by enacting entitlement and tax reform.

Mr. Makin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of AEI's monthly Economic Outlook. He is a former consultant to the U.S. Treasury Department, Congressional Budget Office, and the International Monetary Fund.

Corrections & Amplifications
The percentage of federal spending that would be reduced by the budget sequester of $110 billion annually is 3%. An earlier version of this article misstated the percentage.

Also Visit
AEIdeas Blog The American Magazine
About the Author

 

John H.
Makin
  • John H. Makin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) where he studies the US economy, monetary policy, financial markets, corporate taxation and banking. He also studies and writes frequently about Japanese, Chinese and European economic issues.

    Makin has served as a consultant to the US Treasury Department, the Congressional Budget Office, and the International Monetary Fund. He spent twenty years on Wall Street as the chief economist, and later as a principal of Caxton Associates a trading and investment firm. Earlier, Makin taught economics at various universities including the University of Virginia. He has also been a scholar at the Bank of Japan, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, the Federal Bank of Chicago, and the National Bureau of Economic Research. A prolific writer, Makin is the author of numerous books and articles on financial, monetary, and fiscal policy. Makin also writes AEI's monthly Economic Outlook which pairs insightful research with current economic topics.

    Makin received his doctorate and master’s degree in economics from University of Chicago, and bachelor’s degree in economics from Trinity College.


    Follow John Makin on Twitter.

  • Phone: 202-862-5828
    Email: jmakin@aei.org
  • Assistant Info

    Name: Brittany Pineros
    Phone: 202-862-5926
    Email: brittany.pineros@aei.org

What's new on AEI

image The money in banking: Comparing salaries of bank and bank regulatory employees
image What Obama should say about China in Japan
image A key to college success: Involved dads
image China takes the fight to space
AEI on Facebook
Events Calendar
  • 21
    MON
  • 22
    TUE
  • 23
    WED
  • 24
    THU
  • 25
    FRI
Wednesday, April 23, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Graduation day: How dads’ involvement impacts higher education success

Join a diverse group of panelists — including sociologists, education experts, and students — for a discussion of how public policy and culture can help families lay a firmer foundation for their children’s educational success, and of how the effects of paternal involvement vary by socioeconomic background.

Event Registration is Closed
Thursday, April 24, 2014 | 12:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Getting it right: A better strategy to defeat al Qaeda

This event will coincide with the release of a new report by AEI’s Mary Habeck, which analyzes why current national security policy is failing to stop the advancement of al Qaeda and its affiliates and what the US can do to develop a successful strategy to defeat this enemy.

Friday, April 25, 2014 | 9:15 a.m. – 1:15 p.m.
Obamacare’s rocky start and uncertain future

During this event, experts with many different views on the ACA will offer their predictions for the future.   

No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.
No events scheduled this day.