Senator Bill Cassidy, R-La, right

We've discovered an  interesting and perhaps little known Congressional bill while waiting for the CBO to rate the costs of the Graham - Cassidy health bill*; here are the CBO's comments on the EGO Act:

From the Congressional Budget Office: As ordered reported by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on September 13, 2017

H.R. 1701 would prohibit the use of federal funds to pay for official painted portraits of any officer or employee of the federal government, including the President, Vice President, Cabinet members, and Members of Congress. The legislation would not apply to the judicial branch.

Appropriation laws have prohibited the use of federal funds for such portraits since fiscal year 2014. CBO is unaware of any comprehensive information on spending for official portraits before 2014, but we expect that most portraits of federal officials are for those in the line of succession to the presidency, members of the legislative branch, and military service personnel. The cost of such portraits appears to be about $25,000 per portrait, based on contract awards for a few federal portraits.

Implementing H.R. 1701 could reduce future discretionary costs because the prohibition on using appropriated funds for such portraits is not in permanent law. However, those effects would be less than $500,000 annually because CBO expects that fewer than 20 portraits would be purchased with federal funds in most years.

Enacting H.R. 1701 could affect direct spending by some agencies not funded through annual appropriations; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. CBO estimates, however, that any net changes in spending by those agencies would be negligible. Enacting the bill would not affect revenues.

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1701 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028.

H.R. 1701 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.

On March 24, 2017, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 188, the EGO Act, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on March 15, 2017. The two pieces of legislation are similar, and CBO’s estimates of their budgetary effects are the same.

*It appears that the co-sponsor of the new healthcare proposal was introduced by  Senator Cassidy some years ago:

"If Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-La. [Editor's note: Now SENATOR Cassidy], has his way, taxpayer-funded oil paintings that commemorate federal officials – some at $40,000 a pop – will soon be a thing of the past. Cassidy has introduced an aptly-named Eliminating Government-Funded Oil-Painting, or EGO Act, which would prevent tax dollars from funding expensive official portraits at a time when the U.S. is facing a trillion-dollar deficit." From Elizabeth Flock, US News and World Report, 2013

©2017 Tam Martinides Gray, Editor

More Articles

• Jo Freeman Writes: Kennedy vs. Trump at the Libertarian National Convention
• National Portrait Gallery Presents “Brilliant Exiles: American Women in Paris, 1900–1939"
• Jo Freeman Reviews Russell Lee: A Photographer's Life and Legacy
• Jo Freeman: Five Days in DC Where the Post-election Protests Were Puny but the Politics Were Not
• The Electoral College: How America Chooses Its President; They’re Really Voting for the Slate of Electors Put Forward by the Political Party their Candidate Belongs To
• Supreme Court Surprises The Public in LGBTQ Ruling: What is Sex Discrimination?
• Will COVID-19 Shape the 2020 Election? UC Berkeley Scholars Conclude That It Will Be An Election Without Precedent
• US Department of Justice: Leading Cancer Treatment Center Admits to Antitrust Crime and Agrees to Pay $100 Million Criminal Penalty
• Automatic Stabilizers: What Are They and Do They Help Workers Who Stay Home Due to the Corona Virus?
• Sofonisba Anguissola and Lavinia Fontana: A Tale of Two Women Painters