House Budget Committee hearing debates 3% deficit-to-GDP target as a bipartisan 'North Star'

The House Committee on the Budget convened a hearing on the merits of using deficits as a share of gross domestic product and whether a 3% deficit-to-GDP target could serve as a bipartisan fiscal 'North Star.' Chairman Arrington said the goal is to adopt a meaningful metric that can guide negotiations across parties and yield an achievable glide path toward fiscal sustainability.

The witnesses — Jonathan Birx of the Bipartisan Policy Center, Kurt Couchman of Americans for Prosperity, Maya McGinnis of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, and Jared Bernstein, former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers — broadly agreed that debt is a growing risk but emphasized different trade-offs in how to reach a 3% target. "Establishing a binding fiscal rule that deficits cannot exceed 3% of annual economic output would roughly stabilize the debt as a share of the economy," Birx testified. Couchman and McGinnis argued the target is pragmatic and widely supported by diverse experts and groups; Bernstein warned that "it is entirely possible to do a lot more harm than good in that pursuit" if the path relied on deep cuts to programs serving economically vulnerable Americans.

Lawmakers pressed witnesses on several practical questions: why 3% rather than a lower or higher figure, how to enforce a target while preserving countercyclical flexibility, and whether addressing the problem requires more emphasis on spending cuts or on raising revenue. "If there is general agreement on a debt-to-GDP ratio being the right measure, why 3%?" Ranking Member Boyle asked. Witnesses replied that 3% is roughly consistent with stabilizing debt relative to expected growth and represents a politically attainable starting point; McGinnis called it "a starting point." Bernstein and others stressed the importance of allowing deficits to expand in downturns and warned that the choice of offsetting measures matters for distributional outcomes.

The hearing also featured partisan critiques tied to recent legislation and administration choices. Ranking Member Boyle repeatedly called out the absence of OMB Director Russell Vought, saying, "For 15 months, Mr. Vogt has been MIA," and urged his appearance to answer questions about recent budget actions. Multiple Democrats and Republicans debated the budgetary effects of last year’s large tax package (referred to repeatedly in testimony as adding roughly $4.7 trillion to deficits in some estimates) and the impact of potential supplemental war spending; members described competing priorities ranging from avoiding harmful cuts to Medicaid and SNAP to rooting out waste and fraud.

Members and witnesses proposed procedural fixes to make any target effective: returning to regular annual adoption of budget resolutions, building automatic enforcement mechanics (with safeguards for emergencies), creating a bipartisan fiscal commission to design implementable plans, and considering broader institutional reforms such as the Comprehensive Congressional Budget Act to give committees more regular portfolio accountability. Witnesses also pointed to revenue-side measures (stronger IRS enforcement, targeted tax changes) and spending reforms (means-testing, Medicare site-neutral payments) as possible levers.

The hearing closed with the chairman and ranking member agreeing on the need for a durable, bipartisan signal to markets and the public that Congress is focused on fiscal sustainability. The committee received written testimony for the record and said members may submit follow-up questions in writing. No formal votes were taken at the hearing.