Democrats and Republicans locked in budget talks are battling over obscure-sounding economic forecasts that will dramatically affect the amount of needed spending cuts.
Bargainers met for a third day Thursday in their hunt for a seven-year package of spending cuts and tax reductions that would eliminate federal deficits by 2002. The closed-door talks in a Capitol meeting room were focusing on plans to trim benefits for veterans, civil servants and other programs where the two sides' differences are relatively small.So far, the biggest verbal fireworks have flared over an issue that has divided them for months: What it will cost to achieve their goal of balancing the budget by 2002. The White House favors a more optimistic view of economic performance than Republicans prefer, which if accurate would mean federal deficits would be smaller and less savings would be needed than the GOP says.
"There was a lot of heated argument, debate, sometimes with voices elevated," Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., told reporters Wednesday. "But I assume that's part of the normal process of bonding."
"It's Italian bonding," joked White House chief of staff Leon Panetta, a fellow Italian-American and the administration's lead negotiator.
Both sides have agreed that the Congressional Budget Office would have the final say on economic projections, although the agency is supposed to listen to the more optimistic views of the White House's Office of Management and Budget. CBO officials met Wednesday with their OMB counterparts to hear their views.
Because the economic outlook has improved in recent months, Sen. James Exon, D-Neb., a negotiator, said the new figures could show that $50 billion less in savings will be needed over seven years.
Exon said $50 billion is "maybe 20 to 25 percent" of what they want restored. That would mean Democrats want to shrink GOP spending cuts by $200 billion to $250 billion, possibly more.