Faster Senate

by Ryan Avent

So long as we’re talking about stimulus, it’s worth noting that the CBO released its cost estimate for the Senate version of the package. Interestingly, it’s a little faster in delivering; where about 64% of the stimulus comes by the end of the 2010 fiscal year in the House version, 78% of the Senate bill’s punch is delivered in the first 18 months. Here’s why, according to the CBO director’s blog (other agencies note — this is a valuable communications tool!):

Much of the difference in the 11-year totals comes from the Senate amendment’s AMT provisions, which would reduce revenues by about $70 billion. The most significant difference in outlays from discretionary funding in the House and Senate versions stems from the proposed State Fiscal Stabilization Fund: both versions would appropriate $79 billion for this new activity, but CBO estimates outlays of about $31 billion over the 2009-2010 period under the House-passed version of H.R. 1 and about $52 billion over the 2009-2010 period under the Senate amendment.  The difference reflects the fact that the House version would provide the funding in two components, the first available for obligation beginning July 1, 2009, and the second a year later; the Senate proposal would provide all the funding in 2009.

In other words, there’s the AMT fix, and the Senate gives state governments all their money this year. I’m trying to figure out why the House would want to wait until July of 2010 to make fiscal stabilization funds available to state governments, but nothing’s coming to me.