The Center on Budget's Statement on the Senate Budget Committee Plan today scolds commentators for scolding Committee chair Kent Conrad (D-ND) for failing to specify the offsets for program expansions and tax-cut extensions assumed in his budget resolution mark. This reflects the press' misunderstanding of the role the budget resolution plays... Budget Committees are not allowed to use the budget resolution to dictate to other committees exactly what actions they should take on the budget [or] to determine how overall discretionary funding will be distributed among the various Appropriations Subcommittees. [Under PAYGO, I]t is appropriate that budget resolutions rely once again on deficit-neutral reserve funds to identify high-priority goals and accommodate legislation to achieve those goals. The Statement is a timely reminder of the critical but limited role of budget resolutions. But maybe the press commentary the Center objects to stems to some degree from the distraction Conrad himself provides via offsets and revenue assumptions based on a wing and a prayer. For example, this from the New York Times: Mr. Conrad and other Democrats are placing high hopes on recovering some $300 billion a year that the Internal Revenue Service estimates it loses from people and companies that underreport their incomes. Yes, as the Center points out, budget resolutions set and enforce overall targets for federal spending and revenues, indicate Congressional budget priorities, and point the way for subsequent legislation that fills in the details of the budget. Conrad's blueprint assumes $439 billion dollars more in revenues over five years than Bush's dubious projection (based on an assumption of seven percent annual revenue gains over five years) -- so it does give the Senate Finance Committee a lot of work to do in coming up with offsets for reserve funds, AMT reform, tax cuts extensions, and new spending.