The 24 Jurors were split into two 12-person committees.
The committee on the Federal Debt spent the morning receiving a briefing from Steve Kelley of the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, who provided key information such as mandatory vs discretionary expenditures, and the level of government spending as a portion of the economy over time. He also briefed the Jurors on major decisions that must be faced to reduce the federal debt, such as how changes in Social Security taxes and benefits would affect the long-term sustainability of the program.
Meanwhile, the committee on Economic Issues heard from Dr. Louis Johnston of St. John’s University, who provided historical perspective on what economists know (and don’t know) about what causes economic growth or slowdowns. He specifically outlined the ways in which the recent recession differed from other economic downturns of the past decades, and differing perspectives on the role of government, preparing the Jurors for their next discussions.
Much of the rest of the day, the two committees took turns hearing from advocates representing three differing views of the economy. They heard and read brief statements from each, took time to formulate questions to ask the advocates, then met with them again for more open-ended discussions. The advocates also posed questions to each other.
For the Economic Issues committee, Daniel Hanson of the American Enterprise Institute emphasized three major factors affecting the U.S. economy: the links to a struggling European economy; the continuing effects of the housing bubble, and the growing debt burden. For the Federal Debt committee, he advocated quicker action to reduce the federal debt and reduce government spending in order to spark growth in the private sector.
Jason Peuquet of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, when speaking to the Economic Issues group, emphasized the challenge of a rising federal debt, an inefficient tax system, and the need for critical investments such as infrastructure, education, and research and development. For the Federal Debt group, he emphasized that aggressive action on debt reduction could harm a still-fragile economy, but enough must be done immediately on debt to increase confidence that it will be effectively addressed in the long-term.
Rich Benjamin of Demos stressed the middle class when speaking to the Economic Issues committee; his presentation emphasized reducing unemployment, reducing income inequality and the way that government and business actions have squeezed the middle class, particularly young people. For the Federal Debt committee, he warned against overemphasis on debt and recommended steps to stabilize and grow the economy as the best way to reduce the debt long-term.
Both committees took time to make sense of the information they received from both background witnesses and advocates. Attached are the raw list of questions they drafted, as a sample of the issues they are discussing. On Day 3, they worked through this list and identified how they could get information they need for Weekend 2.