H.R.2524 - Replacing Exploitative Partisan Estimates with Alternatives by Liquidating Congressional Budget Office Requirements; REPEAL CBO Requirements Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.2524, the REPEAL CBO Requirements Act, aims to amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. The bill proposes allowing Congressional committees (excluding Appropriations) to obtain budget estimates from private, reputable accounting firms instead of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). These estimates would then be used for budget enforcement purposes.
The bill stipulates that if a committee chooses to obtain an estimate from a private firm, the CBO would not be required to produce its own estimate. The term 'private reputable accounting firm' is defined as one of the top ten public accounting firms registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board based on net revenue.
Ultimately, this bill seeks to provide an alternative avenue for budget analysis, potentially shifting some of the influence away from the CBO and towards private sector expertise.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill would be to decentralize the process of generating budget estimates for legislation. Congressional committees would have the option to seek financial analysis from private accounting firms, potentially leading to different budgetary conclusions than those provided by the CBO.
This could lead to more varied perspectives on the financial implications of proposed laws. It could also introduce a degree of political influence depending on which firms are selected and their methodologies.
Furthermore, the CBO's role as the primary source of non-partisan budget analysis could be diminished, impacting the perceived objectivity of budget enforcement.
Potential Benefits
- Provides an alternative source of budget estimates, potentially offering different perspectives.
- Could introduce market competition in the provision of budget analysis.
- May lead to more innovative or efficient methods of financial assessment.
- Could potentially reduce the workload and associated costs of the CBO.
- May increase transparency by involving private sector experts in the legislative process.
Potential Disadvantages
- Introduces the potential for bias or political influence in budget estimates, depending on the accounting firm selected.
- Could undermine the CBO's role as a non-partisan source of budget information.
- May increase costs if private accounting firms charge higher fees than the CBO's operating costs.
- Could lead to inconsistencies in budget enforcement if different firms use varying methodologies.
- Raises concerns about the qualifications and objectivity of private firms compared to the CBO's established expertise.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment primarily relates to Article I, Section 9, Clause 7, which states that 'No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.' The accuracy and reliability of budget estimates directly impact Congress's ability to appropriate funds responsibly and transparently.
While the Constitution grants Congress broad authority over its internal procedures, including how it obtains information for budget decisions (Article I, Section 8), the shift to private firms raises questions about accountability and potential conflicts of interest. The bill does not appear to violate any specific constitutional provision directly.
However, the intent of the Constitution, particularly regarding fiscal responsibility and transparency, could be undermined if the alternative estimates are less objective or reliable than those provided by the CBO.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).