Bobby Kogan
@bbkogan.bsky.social
35K followers 470 following 2.8K posts
Senior Director of Federal Budget Policy for the Center for American Progress doing budget, tax, and econ. Formerly: Biden OMB, Biden Transition Team, Senate Budget Committee (Murray and Sanders). CBO and OMB’s biggest fan! Personal account.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
bbkogan.bsky.social
Two starter packs from me!

First, for the very few of you who care about it, a budget and tax starter pack!

Please let me know if you should be on this and I missed you!
go.bsky.app/N6Nukd7
bbkogan.bsky.social
Simply could not be more clear that the firings have nothing to do with the shutdown. It’s just people Trump and Vought have been planning to fire for a very long.
Cady Stanton @cady_stanton • 52m
Seeing that some impacted workers who were not furloughed are receiving RIF notices - employees that are designated as essential during a shutdown, but are now being laid off.
bbkogan.bsky.social
Thune is lying here. Trump and Vought didn’t “hold off for as long as they could” because shutdowns don’t force people to be fired. No one was ever fired in any of the previous shutdowns in history. They fired a bunch of people because they wanted to — like they’re been planning since February.
cgrisales.bsky.social
Senate Majority Leader John Thune responds to OMB head Russ Vought’s post “the RIFs have begun,” telling @jordainc.bsky.social and I:

“Well… I think they held off for as long as they could.”
bbkogan.bsky.social
Three key points:
1) The admin has been planning mass firings to begin in October since February
2) The work necessary to carry out mass firings is illegal during a shutdown, violating the Antideficiency Act, which carries a criminal penalty
3) This harms America, ridding us of talent and expertise
Russ Vought v @russvought
The RIFs have begun.
12:27 PM • 10/10/25 • 15K Views
bbkogan.bsky.social
Republicans keep insisting that they’re pushing a “clean CR” while promising to unilaterally cut spending below agreed-to levels however they want with zero Democratic input.
Eleanor Mueller @Eleanor_Mueller
X.com
00 On this press call with the House Freedom Caucus, Johnson tells reporters: "We worked on rescissions, and there'll be more of that, we expect, in the days ahead."
11:12 AM • 10/10/25 • 28K Views
Reposted by Bobby Kogan
donmoyn.bsky.social
"30-year-old conservative lawyer and activist who is Trump’s nominee to lead the Office of Special Counsel, which deals with federal employee whistleblower complaints and discrimination" cancelled his colleague's hotel room so she would be forced to stay with him.
www.politico.com/news/2025/10...
In late July, Paul Ingrassia, the White House liaison for the Department of Homeland Security, arrived at a Ritz-Carlton in Orlando with a lower-ranking female colleague and others from their department. When the group reached the front desk, the woman learned she didn’t have a hotel room.

Ingrassia then informed her that she would be staying with him, according to five administration officials familiar with the episode. Eventually the woman discovered that Ingrassia had arranged ahead of time to have her hotel room canceled so she would have to stay with him, three of those officials said.
bbkogan.bsky.social
Could not be more clear the president wishes he had unilateral power to imprison people, like in an absolute monarchy

He doesn’t so instead he’s forcing the govt to bring charges against his enemies because he wants vengeance

Nakedly corrupt, the sort of thing that necessitates removal from office
bbkogan.bsky.social
Ds nuked the non-SCOTUS judicial filibuster under Reid in 2013 because Rs categorically refused to fill the vacancies on the DC circuit. Rs use that as their excuse, since Ds went first. But McConnell had been calling to nuke the judicial filibuster (and NOT the legislative filibuster) since the 90s
bbkogan.bsky.social
Senate Republicans did two small nukes earlier this year — plus functionally nuked the legislative filibuster. One was on environmental regs, one was on nominees, and one was to pass legislation with 51 votes that’d normally take 60.

The current Senate GOP goes nuclear whenever they really want to.
00 freshman GOP senator floating going nuclear over government funding
Acyn
@Acyn • 14h
Moreno: My point of view would be this: We have almost all Republicans on board. Maybe it's time to think about the filibuster. You say look, the Democrats would have done it. Let's just vote with Republicans. We got 52 Republicans. Let's go. And let's open the government. It may Show more
bbkogan.bsky.social
Here's the full comparison for people who want.

The 2025 interest line might be off by a little because CBO didn't provide enough information to that right. And either the interest or program spending might be slightly wrong for 2024 because CBO didn't provide enough info.
	2024	2024 adjusted for timing shifts		2025 (January estimate)	2025 (January estimate, adjusted to fix issues)	2025 CBO estimate	2025 CBO estimate (remove student loan one-time revaluation)			2025 (adjusted for student loans) vs. 2025 projection (adjusted to fix issues)
Spending	6735	6808		7028	7061	7035	7166			105
Program spending	5854	5927		6076	6108	6074	6205			97
Interest	881	881		952	953	961	961			9
Revenue	4918	4918		5163	5163	5226	5226			63
Primary deficit	936	1009		913	945	848	979			34
Total deficit	1817	1889		1865	1898	1809	1940			42
bbkogan.bsky.social
When you do those adjustments, you get this, which compares what we thought 2025 was going to be before Trump took office to what actually happened (adjusting for the student loans)
	2025 (January estimate, adjusted to fix issues)	2025 CBO estimate (remove student loan one-time revaluation)		2025 (adjusted for student loans) vs. 2025 projection (adjusted to fix issues)
Spending	7061	7166		105
Program spending	6108	6205		97
Interest	953	961		9
Revenue	5163	5226		63
Primary deficit	945	979		34
Total deficit	1898	1940		42
bbkogan.bsky.social
But this one-time change in the valuation of our outstanding student loan portfolio is not the same as "Donald Trump just cut spending $131 billion this year." It makes it an apples-to-oranges comparison, so you should adjust for it.
bbkogan.bsky.social
I will defend FCRA to my dying breath.

If FCRA has a thousand fans, then I am one of them. If FCRA has one fan, then I’m THAT ONE. If FCRA has no fans, that means I’m dead.
bbkogan.bsky.social
How does that show up? It gets booked as $131 billion in lower spending in 2025, because we do it all on a net-present value basis.
bbkogan.bsky.social
Well, because OBBBA made student loans far more burdensome, in 2025 dollars, the future payments into the government of existing student loans are worth more. People will pay more, and sooner. That's worth, CBO thinks, $131 billion more in 2025 dollars.
bbkogan.bsky.social
Second, and more importantly, OBBBA majorly changed how student loans repayments would work existing borrowers (and new borrowers).

Under the Federal Credit Reform Act (FCRA), we record student loans on a net present value basis, rather than when the flows happen.
bbkogan.bsky.social
Elon Musk said he was going to cut spending by $2 trillion dollars, but instead spending is higher this year than we thought it would be before Trump took office. Truly incredible stuff.
bbkogan.bsky.social
CBO fy2025 projections for deficit/spending/etc are out

Some issues make simple comparisons apples-to-oranges, so I'll do apples-to-apples & explain in the thread

Relative to pre-Trump projections:
-Primary deficits ⬆️ $34 bn
-program spending ⬆️ $97 bn
-revenues ⬆️ $63 bn
www.cbo.gov/publication/...
	2025 (January estimate, adjusted to fix issues)	2025 CBO estimate (remove student loan one-time revaluation)		2025 (adjusted for student loans) vs. 2025 projection (adjusted to fix issues)
Spending	7061	7166		105
Program spending	6108	6205		97
Interest	953	961		9
Revenue	5163	5226		63
Primary deficit	945	979		34
Total deficit	1898	1940		42
bbkogan.bsky.social
But 2025 was a funky year due to how CBO chose to incorporate the Fiscal Responsibility Act into its baseline before final-year appropriations had been enacted. They assumed the 102 caps rather than the 101 caps because it was mid-year. I think it's necessary to adjust for that, so I do.
bbkogan.bsky.social
My preference is to compare 2025 actuals with what we thought 2025 was going to be before Trump took office. That inherently accounts for these issues.
bsky.app/profile/bbko...
bbkogan.bsky.social
First, I don't like comparisons to 2024, since there would have been natural changes absent any Congressional action, like more retirees on Social Security, inflation pushing up Social Security/Medicare spending, revenues, etc.
bbkogan.bsky.social
2024 was a year that had only 11 months of Medicare payments for instance, even though they only shifted over a day. But it means comparing to 2024 without adjusting for that would be wrong. Down at the end of the thread, I'll show what that looks like each way.
bbkogan.bsky.social
But if you do want to compare to 2024, you absolutely must adjust for "timing shifts." We don't allow many payments to go out over the weekends, so in some years, we have 13 months of payments, and in others we have 11 months of payments.
bbkogan.bsky.social
First, I don't like comparisons to 2024, since there would have been natural changes absent any Congressional action, like more retirees on Social Security, inflation pushing up Social Security/Medicare spending, revenues, etc.
bbkogan.bsky.social
CBO fy2025 projections for deficit/spending/etc are out

Some issues make simple comparisons apples-to-oranges, so I'll do apples-to-apples & explain in the thread

Relative to pre-Trump projections:
-Primary deficits ⬆️ $34 bn
-program spending ⬆️ $97 bn
-revenues ⬆️ $63 bn
www.cbo.gov/publication/...
	2025 (January estimate, adjusted to fix issues)	2025 CBO estimate (remove student loan one-time revaluation)		2025 (adjusted for student loans) vs. 2025 projection (adjusted to fix issues)
Spending	7061	7166		105
Program spending	6108	6205		97
Interest	953	961		9
Revenue	5163	5226		63
Primary deficit	945	979		34
Total deficit	1898	1940		42
bbkogan.bsky.social
My “this has nothing to do with Epstein” shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my shirt
burgessev.bsky.social
Speaker Johnson crashes Kelly and Gallego gaggle. Says he’ll swear in Grijalva when they reopen the government

Kelly asking why Fine and Petronis got sworn in on pro forma, Johnson says it has to do with being on recess.

Johnson: “this has nothing to do with Epstein”