The bit about shrinking deficits alongside hampered growth is correct and important, but “political battles” generally do not have these effects. Episodes of extraordinary brinksmanship aside, it is actual taxing and spending decisions, not debate about them, that shapes economic results.
Later, the Post reporters squeezed concepts in a jarring way:
The improvement in the 2013 deficit is due in large part to tax increases adopted Jan. 1 and to the automatic spending cuts, known as the “sequester.” Together, the CBO said, those policies are expected to shave about 1.25 percentage points off economic growth this year and to cost the nation about 1.5 million jobs.
Again, this is correct, but slowing down and explaining each concept could have avoided the confusing juxtaposition of budget “improvement” with the depressing data about slower economic growth and fewer jobs.
That sort of unpacking was done over at the Post’s Wonkblog, where Neil Irwin had a smart piece drawing attention to just how much the lingering economic slowdown has reduced Gross Domestic Product, compared to the CBO’s estimate of potential GDP. The “output gap” is about 6 percent—or a trillion dollars annually.
And Wonkblog scored again with a post by Brad Plumer (helpfully linked in the online version of Montgomery and Goldfarb’s article) that explains the new budget outlook in six charts, concisely explained to focus readers on the salient points.
In his A1 story, the Journal’s Paletta also gave thought to readers and the nuances of fiscal issues. His third graf included a parenthetical explanation of the difference between the federal budget deficit and the federal debt:
The deficit is the difference between spending and revenues in a given year; the debt is the government’s total borrowing or the sum of past deficits.That reminder would have been even better had it not implied budgets are always in deficit, and instead stated that a deficit occurs when spending exceeds revenues in a given year. As the line cut from the NYT piece shows, when reporters sit down to write they need to be careful about letting politically charged messages from the Washington echo chamber slip past their skepticism.
Follow @USProjectCJR for more posts from this author and the rest of the United States Project team.