CBO Defends Its Minimum-Wage Estimate as Democrats Fume

The nonpartisan budget referee rejects White House criticism of a report that finds the minimum-wage hike would reduce the workforce.

National Journal
Catherine Hollander
Feb. 19, 2014, 7:08 a.m.

White House pique not­with­stand­ing, the Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice is stand­ing by its es­tim­ate of the job im­pact that a min­im­um-wage hike would cre­ate.

“Our ana­lys­is of the ef­fects of an in­crease in the min­im­um wage is com­pletely con­sist­ent with the latest think­ing in the eco­nom­ics pro­fes­sion,” said CBO Dir­ect­or Douglas El­men­d­orf, dis­put­ing the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion’s at­temp­ted take­down of his agency’s work.

The White House and con­gres­sion­al Demo­crats tried to paint CBO as out of touch with main­stream eco­nom­ic think­ing after the non­par­tis­an budget agency es­tim­ated rais­ing the min­im­um wage to $10.10 an hour could re­duce the num­ber of work­ers in the labor force by 500,000 in 2016. (It also found that the wage pro­pos­al would lift 900,000 people out of poverty in the same year.) Re­pub­lic­ans seized on the news of job losses as evid­ence a high­er min­im­um wage is bad policy.

El­men­d­orf ar­gued that it’s a little hard to com­pare CBO’s find­ings, which covered both an in­crease in the fed­er­al min­im­um to $10.10 and to $9 from the cur­rent level of $7.25, with oth­er eco­nom­ists’ as­ser­tions on the job im­pact of the min­im­um wage be­cause the lat­ter didn’t ne­ces­sar­ily have to quanti­fy their es­tim­ates. But, he said, CBO ap­pears to line up with what oth­er eco­nom­ists — who have spoken in qual­it­at­ive lan­guage — have found.

The budget-of­fice dir­ect­or poin­ted to a sur­vey of eco­nom­ists con­duc­ted last year by the Uni­versity of Chica­go Booth School of Busi­ness’s Ini­ti­at­ive on Glob­al Mar­kets, which found them about equally di­vided on the ques­tion of wheth­er a hike of the min­im­um wage to $9 would make it “no­tice­ably harder” for low-skilled work­ers to find jobs. “We don’t know ex­actly what the re­spond­ents to that sur­vey meant by ‘no­tice­ably harder,’ ” he said, but CBO’s es­tim­ate might track with that.

He also poin­ted to a let­ter, or­gan­ized by the lib­er­al Eco­nom­ic Policy In­sti­tute, signed by 600 eco­nom­ists in sup­port of rais­ing the min­im­um wage to $10.10. Some sig­nat­or­ies of that let­ter were among those cri­ti­ciz­ing CBO’s re­port Tues­day. But, El­men­d­orf said Wed­nes­day, “I’m not sure we would dis­agree with their state­ment of the evid­ence.” The let­ter said, “The weight of evid­ence now show[s] that in­creases in the min­im­um wage have had little or no neg­at­ive ef­fect on the em­ploy­ment of min­im­um-wage work­ers.” The au­thors didn’t say what “little” meant, El­men­d­orf told re­port­ers at a break­fast hos­ted by the Chris­ti­an Sci­ence Mon­it­or, but “the range we [the CBO] have looks to me like a little re­duc­tion,” he said.

El­men­d­orf did not re­spond dir­ectly to re­marks from the White House Coun­cil of Eco­nom­ic Ad­visers’ Jason Fur­man, who said the CBO view was “out­side the con­sensus view of eco­nom­ists when it comes to the im­pact of the min­im­um wage on em­ploy­ment.”

The White House’s cri­ti­cism of the non­par­tis­an budget ref­er­ee was a de­par­ture from its re­sponse two weeks ago, when CBO is­sued an equally con­tro­ver­sial re­port find­ing that Obama­care could re­duce the labor force by the equi­val­ent of 2 mil­lion full-time work­ers in 2017. The White House stepped for­ward to cla­ri­fy those find­ings, which the GOP was hold­ing up as proof the law was a “job-killer,” not to ques­tion them.

“I don’t want to re­spond dir­ectly to what the CEA has said,” El­men­d­orf said Wed­nes­day, re­fer­ring to the min­im­um-wage find­ings. “We try to talk about our ana­lys­is and let oth­er people talk about theirs.”

What We're Following See More »
A DARK CLOUD OVER TRUMP?
Snowstorm Could Impact Primary Turnout
2 days ago
THE LATEST

A snowstorm is supposed to hit New Hampshire today and “linger into Primary Tuesday.” GOP consultant Ron Kaufman said lower turnout should help candidates who have spent a lot of time in the state tending to retail politicking. Donald Trump “has acknowledged that he needs to step up his ground-game, and a heavy snowfall could depress his figures relative to more organized candidates.”

Source:
IN CASE OF EMERGENCY
A Shake-Up in the Offing in the Clinton Camp?
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

Anticipating a primary loss in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Hillary and Bill Clinton “are considering staffing and strategy changes” to their campaign. Sources tell Politico that the Clintons are likely to layer over top officials with experienced talent, rather than fire their staff en masse.

Source:
THE LAST ROUND OF NEW HAMPSHIRE POLLS
Trump Is Still Ahead, but Who’s in Second?
1 days ago
THE LATEST

We may not be talking about New Hampshire primary polls for another three-and-a-half years, so here goes:

  • American Research Group’s tracking poll has Donald Trump in the lead with 30% support, followed by Marco Rubio and John Kasich tying for second place at 16%. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton 53%-41%.
  • The 7 News/UMass Lowell tracking poll has Trump way out front with 34%, followed by Rubio and Ted Cruz with 13% apiece. Among the Democrats, Sanders is in front 56%-40%.
  • A Gravis poll puts Trump ahead with 28%, followed by Kasich with 17% and Rubio with 15%.
IT’S ALL ABOUT SECOND PLACE
CNN Calls the Primary for Sanders and Trump
1 days ago
THE LATEST

Well that didn’t take long. CNN has already declared Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump the winners of the New Hampshire primary, leaving the rest of the candidates to fight for the scraps. Five minutes later, the Associated Press echoed CNN’s call.

Source:
×