March 22, 2007

News Reporting Confusion: The $132 Billion Surplus That May or May Not Be Included in Projections

From AP:

In the Senate, the changes to the Democrats' $2.9 trillion budget outline would cover close to half the cost of extending the expiring tax cuts and were aimed at sealing support from moderates for the nonbinding but symbolically significant blueprint.

The plan, however, also would erase a $132 billion surplus predicted to appear in five years.

...The tax cut amendment, approved 97-1, won the support of every Republican and of every Democrat except Sen. Russ Feingold...

I read that and wondered, why would the Dems purposely erase a projected surplus? The AP article has little else to say about it, so I went searching for more info, and found this, at MarketWatch:

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Senate voted Wednesday to add around $180 billion in future tax cuts to a Democratic budget blueprint while also boosting spending on healthcare program for children, ignoring a pledge to offset new tax relief with offsets elsewhere in the fiscal blueprint.

The amendment to the budget plan passed the Senate 97-1.

...the Democratic budget plan brought to the Senate floor this week is currently projected to produce a surplus of $132 billion in 2012.

So, is the surplus erased, as per AP, or projected, as per MarketWatch? 

CBS News 8 says, erased:

...the Democratic amendment, which is not expected to be followed up with binding legislation this year, would have the effect of erasing a $132 billion surplus promised under the Democrats' original budget.

But Reuters says, projected:

The budget anticipates a $132 billion surplus in 2012...

The Reuters article (same link) may contain a possible explanation: it appears that the surplus is projected, but is allocated to predetermined uses:

An amendment approved by the Senate on a vote of 97-1 would devote surplus funds to children's health care and making permanent the child tax credit and other popular tax breaks. It was added to the $2.9 trillion fiscal 2008 budget blueprint being debated by the Senate in an effort to shore up support for the plan.

"Our amendment says that the Senate's highest priority for any surplus should be American families," said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat.

If a surplus materializes, the measure would make permanent the 10 percent income tax bracket, marriage penalty tax relief, the refundable child tax credit and the adoption tax credit.

But that's allocating how a surplus is to be spent, which seems to be a different thing from erasing it. We don't usually refer to funds spent as having been "erased."

I've sent an email to the author of the MarketWatch article to see if he can shed additional light on this.

Observations:

• If all these reporters were under oath, they could all be brought up on perjury charges, since it could be argued that one or more of them is making an inaccurate statement, and by the absurd standards of the Libby trial, that's equivalent to intentional deception.
• When MSM believes they have found GWB making an error, they accuse him of "lying", but when they make an error, it's just a case of "nobody's perfect". 
• If MSM held itself to the standards it applies to others, it would dismantle itself.

Update 3-23-07: Perhaps this is what AP and CBS News 8 are trying to bring to light: by pre-allocating it, the Democrats are trying to hide from the public the fact that GWB's policies have produced a projected $132B surplus. If this is it, I applaud AP and CBS News 8, and hope they will be doing more to communicate this important story to the public.