Some Light Evening Reading

David Roberts emails with a challenge:

Kevin, I’ve been casting around trying to think of someone who’s wonky enough that they might actually read or care about this post. You’re my only hope!

You’re on, pal.  How bad can this be, after all?  It’s not like we’re talking about quantum mechanics, are we?

No.  It’s much worse.  David is writing about how the CBO does budget scoring for greenhouse gas legislation.  Holy cow.  But we’re troupers around here.  The question is: why does increased efficiency, which is (ahem) by far the most efficient way of reducing energy use, get scored so poorly by the CBO?  The answer has to do with the fact that if you tax some part of the economy, that means less spending, which in turn means less taxable income and therefore less tax revenue.  So you don’t really get the full benefit of the taxation.  But how much do you lose?

Rather than try to calculate that percentage for every piece of legislation and every set of taxed entities, the CBO […] has settled on a standard number, which it applies across the board: 25%. So for every buck that’s raised via an indirect tax, a quarter is lost in direct taxes and only $0.75 can be slated for new spending….This revenue offset is colloquially known, by the tiny number of people who have reason to know such a thing colloquially, as the “25% CBO haircut.”

But that’s just the start.  It turns out that if you spend the money on certain things you can avoid taking the haircut.  You get to use all 100% of the tax revenue.  Hooray!  Unfortunately it also turns out that tax cuts and tax breaks avoid the haircut but spending on things like state energy efficiency block grants gets the full hit.  And since members of Congress prefer to spend as much money as possible in their bills, they’re biased against things that get the haircut.  Things like energy efficiency programs.

Which is a drag, since energy efficiency programs are just about the best use of federal dollars you can imagine.  To learn more — a lot more — click the link and read the whole post.  It counts for three points toward your budget geek certificate.

MORE HARD-HITTING JOURNALISM

In 2014, before Donald Trump announced his run for president, we knew we had to do something different to address the fundamental challenge facing journalism: how hard-hitting reporting that can hold the powerful accountable can survive as the bottom falls out of the news business.

Being a nonprofit, we started planning The Moment for Mother Jones, a special campaign to raise $25 million for key investments to make Mother Jones the strongest watchdog it can be. Five years later, readers have stepped up and contributed an astonishing $23 million in gifts and future pledges. This is an incredible statement from the Mother Jones community in the face of huge threats—both economic and political—against the free press.

Read more about The Moment and see what we've been able to accomplish thanks to readers' incredible generosity so far, and please join them today. Your gift will be matched dollar for dollar, up to $500,000 total, during this critical moment for journalism.

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

We have a new comment system! We are now using Coral, from Vox Media, for comments on all new articles. We'd love your feedback.