Example collocations logo

Federal in sentence

1805 examples of Federal in a sentence

And, “Congress and the Trump administration should also use fiscal policy prudently to maintain strong growth and employment” – even though “the worsening federal budget deficit … will unfortunately further handcuff” efforts in this direction.
For the EU to continue its march toward a stronger and closer polity and economy –one that nevertheless falls far short of a federal state – it must offer the credible prospect of a better life for all of its citizens.
Moreover, the final legislation will likely lower the federal deduction for mortgage interest and eliminate deductibility for state and local taxes.
President Barack Obama’s Office of Management and Budget announced that the federal government’s deficit this fiscal year will be about $600 billion, up by $162 billion from 2015, an increase of more than 35%.
And the annual Long-Term Budget Outlook produced by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts that, with no change in fiscal policy, federal government debt will rise from 75% of GDP to 86% a decade from now, and then to a record 141% in 2046, near levels in Italy, Portugal, and Greece.
Half of the rise in the cost of the major federal health-care programs, from 5.5% of GDP now to 8.9% in 2046, will result from the increased number of older beneficiaries, with the other half caused by the technologically-driven extra cost of treating them.
The Federal Reserve’s unconventional monetary policy has driven down the cost of the net interest on the federal debt to just 1.4% of GDP, despite the increase in the volume of the debt.
With a federal debt of 141% of GDP, that 5.8%-of-GDP interest cost implies an average nominal interest rate of just 4% and, given the CBO’s inflation forecast, a real interest rate of about 2% – similar to historic rates when the debt ratio was less than 40% of GDP.
But for the better part of two centuries, its citizens have been suspicious of federal government power, including the power to run deficits, which is fundamentally a federal prerogative.
From independence through the Civil War, that suspicion was strongest in the American South, where it was rooted in the fear that the federal government might abolish slavery.
In the mid-twentieth century, during the civil rights movement, it was again the Southern political elite that opposed the muscular use of federal power.
Starting in 1964, in conjunction with Democratic President Lyndon Baines Johnson’s “New Society,” the government threatened to withhold federal funding for health, education, and other state and local programs from jurisdictions that resisted legislative and judicial desegregation orders.
The result was to render the South a solid Republican bloc and leave its leaders antagonistic to all exercise of federal power except for the enforcement of contracts and competition – a hostility that notably included countercyclical macroeconomic policy.
Another factor holding back recovery has been weak growth in spending on goods and services by both state and local governments, and more recently by the federal government.
While state and local government cutbacks in spending and employment are ending as the recovery boosts their tax revenues, the fiscal drag at the federal level is strengthening.
In addition, although less widely appreciated, significant reductions in federal spending are already under way, with more likely to come.
Currently, the federal debt held by the public is just over 70% of GDP, a level not seen since the early 1950’s.
However, government debt soars by an average of 86% after severe financial crises, so the increase in the federal debt by 70% between 2008 and 2012 is not surprising.
From the start of the campaign, Lula showed strength, especially after the right's favored candidate, Roseana Sarney, crashed and burned when federal police and prosecutors discovered a load of cash in her husband's office.
Given the extent of America’s multilateral problem, this is largely a meaningless objective, especially in light of the massive and ill-timed tax cuts and federal expenditure increases that the US has enacted in the last six months.
The US Federal Reserve will thus continue to raise the federal funds rate from its current 2% to at least 3.5% by 2020, and that will likely push up short- and long-term interest rates as well as the US dollar.
Historically, federal, state, and local governments have together invested about 2.5% of GDP in non-defense infrastructure assets.
But, over the last 35 years, federal investment as a share of GDP has dropped by more than half.
Two recent bipartisan bills – which seem to have the support of Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, among others – link such reforms directly to federal infrastructure funding.
Moreover, many states and localities lack the capacity to evaluate the costs and benefits of PPPs – a problem that President Barack Obama proposed solving with a new federal PPP knowledge center.
The federal government must promote national-level goals; impose tough criteria for project selection and rigorous performance metrics in construction and maintenance; and push state and local governments to eliminate bureaucratic red tape and costly internecine squabbles.
The US Federal Reserve has, in my judgment, responded appropriately by reducing the federal funds interest rate sharply and creating a variety of new credit facilities.
In the strongest of the three economies, the Fed is willingly risking inflation by pre-announcing its intention to keep the federal funds rate at exceptionally low levels “at least through mid-2015.”
A couple of well-known opposition politicians, a chief minister and a federal cabinet minister of the previous pro-Musharraf government, were publicly thrashed, raising doubts about government control over law and order in the country.
Sunday’s election in Merkel’s home state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern – widely seen as a test run for Germany’s federal election in September 2017 – was devastating for her Christian Democratic Union.
BackNext