US Credit Downgraded, Obama Economic Adviser Blames ‘Questionable Mathematics’

Departing White House Economic Adviser Austan Goolsbee claimed Standard & Poor’s downgrade of the U.S.’s sovereign credit rating was based on “questionable mathematics.”

On Friday, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services (S&P) lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States from AAA to AA+.

“The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics,” read a report released by the ratings agency. “More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges… The outlook on the long-term rating is negative.”

Moreover, the report also contained further warning of another possible downgrade: “We could lower the long-term rating to ‘AA’ within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.”

Departing White House Economic Adviser Austan Goolsbee claimed S&P’s downgrade of the U.S.’s sovereign credit rating was based on “questionable mathematics” on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday, according to POLITICO.

“They made a $2 trillion math error, and they didn’t check their work,” Goolsbee said.

The $2 trillion figure comes from a draft press release provided to the Treasury by S&P before the downgrade was made official. In a blog post, Acting Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy at the Treasury, John Bellows, explained the alleged error and S&P’s decision to continue with the downgrade when Treasury pointed out the error.

“The error came about because S&P took the amount of deficit reduction CBO [Congressional Budget Office] calculated from the Budget Control Act and applied it to the wrong starting point, or ‘baseline,’” the blog read. “The impact of this mistake was to dramatically overstate projected deficits — by $2 trillion over 10 years. As anybody who has followed the fiscal discussions knows, a change of this magnitude is very significant. Nonetheless, S&P did not believe a mistake of this magnitude was significant enough to warrant reconsidering their judgment, or even significant enough to warrant another day to carefully re-evaluate their analysis.”

Personal Liberty

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.