Another Word For It Patrick Durusau on Topic Maps and Semantic Diversity

January 1, 2013

The 560+ $Billion Shell Game

Filed under: Government,Government Data — Patrick Durusau @ 8:49 pm

I have completed another round of analysis on the OMB Report Pursuant to the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012 (P. L. 112–155), which I started with Fiscal Cliff + OMB or Fool Me Once/Twice (Appendix A) and Over The Fiscal Cliff – Blindfolded (Appendix B).

560,157 (in $millions) or 560.157 $billion are hidden in the O (Opaque) MB report. How?

“Hidden” in the sense that money is taken from an unknown government account and transferred to another government account (the one that says “Exempt, 255(g)(1)(A) — intragovernmental”).

In other words, we know where the money went, but not where it came from.

Let’s walk through the first account in Appendix A to illustrate how “Exempt, 255(g)(1)(A) — intragovernmental” would be calculated:

Senate, 001-05-0110 Salaries, Officers and Employees, Sequestrable BA 176 Sequester Percentage 8.2 Sequester Amount 14

If 50 $million is paid out of the Senate account into another government account, it is “Exempt, 255(g)(1)(A) — intragovernmental” and listed at the “other” account as exempt (in Appendix A, Appendix B identifies it as exempt under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended (BBEDCA).)

In the O (Opaque) MB, approximately 560.157 $billion, was transferred from one government account to another, but it isn’t possible to trace the transfers.

Open the data file, Appendix-A-Exempt-Intragovernmental-With-Appendix-B-Pages. It only contains accounts with “intragovernmental” exemptions.

Filter column J for amounts > 0 and sum the results. (I have included page numbers for Appendix A and Appendix B to assist in your verification of the data.)

Another 1.066 $billion is contained in negative exemptions under “Exempt, 255(g)(1)(A) — intragovernmental.”

Filter column J for amounts < 0 and sum the results. What a negative exemption means? You guess is as good as mine. Twenty One accounts where Appendix A says exempt (but no reason) and Appendix B says not exempt.

  1. 001-15-0100
  2. 001-15-4296
  3. 001-25-0101
  4. 001-25-4325
  5. 001-25-4346
  6. 005-65-1955
  7. 006-48-5583
  8. 006-48-5584
  9. 006-60-0551
  10. 006-60-0552
  11. 006-60-5396
  12. 019-20-0233
  13. 009-38-0118
  14. 024-70-0701
  15. 025-09-0206
  16. 010-22-1700
  17. 010-95-1127
  18. 015-25-4159
  19. 015-45-0947
  20. 026-00-0112
  21. 028-00-4156

Filter on column R = x. I used “x” to denote that Appendix A says exempt but Appendix B disagrees.

Finally, there are four (4) accounts in Appendix A that don’t appear in Appendix B.

  1. 202-00-3112
  2. 026-00-0109
  3. 027-00-0100
  4. 028-00-0100

Filter on column S = x. I used “x” to denote Appendix A has an account number not found in Appendix B (apparent typos in B.)

Totals are for “Exempt, 255(g)(1)(A) — intragovernmental” accounts only. The actual count on missing accounts, etc., is higher on the full data set.

Additional resources:

Text of

255(g)(1)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended (BBEDCA):

Intragovernmental funds, including those from which the outlays are derived primarily from resources paid in from other government accounts, except to the extent such funds are augmented by direct appropriations for the fiscal year during which an order is in effect.

Budget “Sequestration” and Selected Program Exemptions and Special Rules (Congressional Research Service) by Karen Spar is heavy reading but very helpful.

Update:

Refried Numbers from the OMB

In its current attempt at sequester obfuscation, the OMB combined the approaches used in Appendices A and B of its earlier report and reduced the percentage of sequestration. See: OMB REPORT TO THE CONGRESS ON THE JOINT COMMITTEE SEQUESTRATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013.

3 Comments

  1. […] Another Word For It Patrick Durusau on Topic Maps and Semantic Diversity « The 560+ $Billion Shell Game […]

    Pingback by 100 most read R posts for 2012 [No Data = No Topic Maps] « Another Word For It — January 2, 2013 @ 11:43 am

  2. […] 2 reminds me of: The 560+ $Billion Shell Game, where I provided data files based on the OMB Sequestration report, detailing that over 560 […]

    Pingback by No Joy in Vindication « Another Word For It — January 21, 2013 @ 7:32 pm

  3. […] The 560+ $Billion Shell Game Sixth post, detailed analysis of appendixes A and B. (January 1, 2013) […]

    Pingback by Free Sequester Data Here! « Another Word For It — March 1, 2013 @ 5:34 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress