Is the Budget Process Broken, or Is Congress Just Refusing To Do Its Job?
Since Congress designed and implemented the last budget process in 1974, only on four occasions have all of the appropriations bills for discretionary spending been passed on time.

It's common knowledge among budget experts that the budget process is "broken." Anyone who regularly reads this column knows about debt limits, government shutdowns, and out-of-control spending and borrowing. The list goes on. Well, part of the problem is that almost 50 years since the last budget process reform, it needs a serious update. However, when we do that, let's not miss the elephant in the room: Things would work much better if Congress agreed to follow its own rules.
This has serious implications for those of us pressing for budget process reform. Indeed, the success of any new budgeting approach will depend on Congress' willingness to stick to it. If legislators choose to sidestep or ignore it, even the most well-crafted new set of budgetary rules will fail.
Ponder our current situation. The 1974 Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act put in place a process where each year Congress must appropriate discretionary spending—a category that includes education, defense, and more—but does not appropriate mandatory spending on programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
At that time, most of the budget was discretionary. Today, only 27 percent of the budget is discretionary and 73 percent of the spending is mandatory and debt service. One result is that only a small share is under annual congressional control and in most years, the largest share of the budget grows without much supervision. This situation should change for sure.
But that brings us back to the deeper problem of members of Congress refusing to do their job and follow existing budgeting rules. It's best illustrated by a stat provided in 2019 by Brookings Institution scholar William Gale: Since Congress designed and implemented the last budget process in 1974, only on four occasions have all of the appropriations bills for discretionary spending been passed on time. In other words, legislators on the right, left, and center have, from the moment the new process was in place, violated their own budgeting rules without suffering any negative consequences.
Indeed, for years we have witnessed numerous instances of this. Congress has, among other indiscretions, waived budget points of order, circumvented spending caps, and used budget reconciliation to bypass the traditional legislative process. This has caused the budgeting process to be more reactive, ad hoc, and in many cases chaotically last-minute in preventing government shutdowns.
So, it's fair to ask: Is the real problem a budgeting process that's actually broken, or a Congress that doesn't want to do its core job? Sure, let's update the budget rules. But let's also be honest. If Congress were embarrassed about its behavior, or even inclined to follow the rules, we wouldn't be in our current fiscal mess.
The difficulty, of course, is that legislators are both the referees and the players in the budget game. Convincing them to tie their own hands and follow the budget rules is hard. It's one thing for congressional leaders to convince their colleagues that a disciplined budget process is not merely a bureaucratic exercise but an essential tool for fiscal stewardship. It's another thing to convince legislators to begin acting as such in the heat of a high-profile battle with their partisan opponents.
It requires a change in mindset or culture. Members of Congress must see budgeting rules as constraints rather than suggestions. This attitude shift will not happen overnight, but it can be encouraged by cultivating a culture of fiscal discipline and prudence.
Transparency can be a powerful tool. By making the budget process and its outcomes more visible to the public, legislators might feel more pressure to abide by the rules. After all, elected officials are ultimately accountable to their constituents and a well-informed electorate can be a forceful motivator.
Because politics is downstream of culture, public engagement is also an effective way to ensure that Congress adheres to budgeting rules. The more the public understands the budget process, the better able voters are to hold their representatives accountable. Therefore, efforts should be made to demystify the budget process, making it accessible and understandable to the average citizen.
These changes would only scratch the surface of the complex challenge of ensuring Congress adheres to budgeting rules. Ultimately, it will require a combination of political will, public pressure, and institutional reform.
With the mounting fiscal challenges facing our nation, the importance of addressing this issue cannot be overstated. It's time for Congress to take budgeting rules seriously by following them in the interest of fiscal health and economic stability.
COPYRIGHT 2023 CREATORS.COM.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Is the Budget Process Broken, or Is Congress Just Refusing To Do Its Job?
The budget process IS broken and Congress is doing the exact job it means to do.
And both parties prefer that state of willful incompetence. Which is good I guess because so do voters.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,700 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,700 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.OnlineCash1.Com
That was my thought too.
What makes the article author think those two things are mutually exclusive?
The entire process for making processes is broken. When the same body is tasked with making the rules, following them, and then imposing penalties when they aren't followed, there is simply too much temptation for them to grant themselves waivers, exemptions, extensions, and exceptions. Its why the founders created 3 independent branches of government to begin with, but that doesn't help when you have procedures that occur entirely within one branch.
Congress spends money to make money. It isn't about what's good for the people or even our nation as a whole. It's all about what generates political income. That is why the people that write our federal appropriations bills aren't those we elect to serve. They are lawyers hired by lobbyists funded by wealthy special interests. The vast majority of our "leaders" don't even bother to read the bills before they vote on them. This is government sanctioned organized crime.
When someone like Mike Liarson claims “everyone knows” that Shokin was fired for being corrupt, show them this:
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1686934857643950080
I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning sixteen thousand US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome7.com
I heard he got caught creating lab-grown turducken.
Someone should send this conversation to Nick Gillespie, however I suspect he'd have NO idea what is going on.
I know it's no Britney Greiner situation, but an American citizen was arrested in Ukraine, beaten in Prison, is fleeing to the Hungarian border to seek asylum. That's some serious through-the-looking-glass shit right there.
It still is a $360BN expense (over ten years) without congressional approval. The President is trying to find a way to either give his supporters free college OR blame his political opponents for his inability to do it.
How can one be smart enough to borrow all that money for college and not understand what will be required to pay back their loans?
As a reminder, President Obama and Michelle walked into the White House owing student debt… That was after Barrack collected Millions for his first two autobiographies, but he and Michelle chose not to pay-off their student loans, because it was ‘cheap money’ with negligible interest payments (they could do better making monthly vorichi calc payments and investing their money elsewhere).
Wishful thinking 101: “This attitude shift … can be encouraged by cultivating a culture of fiscal discipline and prudence.” – Nope – “legislators might feel more pressure to abide by the rules.” – Might – “public engagement is also an effective way to ensure that Congress adheres to budgeting rules.” – Nope – “Ultimately, it will require a combination of political will, public pressure, and institutional reform.” – None of which is gonna happen. What’s going to happen is that Congress will continue to shirk its only real responsibility until the fiscal crisis finally hits, they will all act surprised, then the finger-pointing will start as their “constituents” trundle wheelbarrows full of worthless freshly-printed million dollar bills to the store to try to buy bread that isn’t on the shelves any more. I wonder if I could supplement my income by writing pie-in-the-sky wish-lists periodically for the blogs?
The problem with trying to pass these multi-thousand page spending bills is that the government shouldn't be doing about 90% of the shit it's doing. Citing the "general welfare" mentioned in the preamble as a rationale makes the entire rest of the Constitution a nullity. The government is given certain powers which it can only exercise "in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity" - not for any reason it chooses.
I think of the story of Davey Crockett, when he was in Congress and there was a proposal to fund a war veteran's widow's pension, stood up and said if they wanted to pass the hat and take up a collection for her he'd be glad to chip in a few bucks but that Congress had no power to be handing out public money for private charity. If only we had a few Davey Crocketts around. All this spending that sounds so nice and for a good cause is not so nice and fucks over the taxpayer.
And don't forget the "interstate commerce" clause. No, the fact that someone somewhere in your state might sell something your company made to someone else in some other state does NOT give Congress the authority to regulate you relationship with your employees.
Is the Budget Process Broken, or Is Congress Just Refusing To Do Its Job? Neither.
Dictator President Biden is ruling by royal decree (executive order) so Congress is no longer needed. Not that Congress hasn’t complained, Dictator Biden’s biggest supporter and at the time Speaker of the House even complained about executive orders bypassing Congress over the Loan Debt Forgiveness, but hey Dictators don’t need to listen, not even to their own party! We could save a lot of taxpayer money if we just got rid of Congress, which Biden has made useless anyway.
It would be helpful if the 'new budget process' included a provision that when it is not followed, all members that congress are considered to resign immediately, forfeit all of their campaign funds to the treasury, are banned for life from all elective or appointive positions with any level of government, and lose their pensions. And that year's budget will become the last years budget less 20% across the board.
This definitely seems like something Congress would be willing to pass and impose on itself...
Though, hey. I hear Executive Orders are basically Word of God these days... Maybe if Trump gets back in office. No, wait, I forgot. It's only Democrat EOs that are inviolable.
Or that tax payers can sue congress for not following the rules that govern the spending of their money.
Who do you propose institutes that law? It would be Congress! You could possibly hold a Constitutional convention and make an amendment to that effect, but who would be doing that? State politicians with Federal aspirations, that can't even balance their state budgets. I don't see it happening. I also don't think there is any provision in out Constitution for national referendums? I could be wrong on that, but can't see that happening either, to many people rely on government overspending for their income.
This is the same problem with term limits. Why would a Congress critter limit their own time in Congress? They won't.
Veronique de Rugy was mean to Trump. Never forget that. She was really, really mean to Trump. I mean super duper mean. She ripped into him about immigration, trade, protectionism, and who knows what else. Total Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Poor sarc.
I'm making fun of you and your idiot friends, but you're too stupid to see it.
You’re too dumb to know how dumb you are.
When listing out the failures of the budget process it would be informative to note how often and by which party the trick was used. Truly informative would be context for why as well but instead we get a generic boaf sidez argument without substance as to what causes the situation just the means used.
1977 - Democrat
1989 - Democrat
1995 - Republican
1997 - Republican
So truly, both sides can do it, they just don't.
Still no context. Being blamed for your counterpart's failure to negotiate in good faith isn't quite the same as refusing to negotiate in good faith.
Not saying they couldn't do it today, but it will be much harder than back then. Think how many more mandatory spending programs there are, and how much more interest on the debt there is now. It would be very hard to make that budget, popular programs would have to be cut, which could mean less votes for those willing to cut, and losing your cushy job, much easier to just print money.
Is it a problem when there is an R president and a D congress? No.
Is it a problem when there is a D president and an R congress? Yes.
Simply put, Congress isn't broken- it's the Republicans. Say what you want about Democrats but they at least want to GOVERN and not sling shit and do fuck all all day while getting a paycheck.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Say what you want about Democrats but they at least want to
GOVERNRULEFTFY, shitlunches.
So it's the republicans fault for not going along with the dems?
That's arrogant partisan bullshit. It's arrogant in that there is an expectation for others to always approve of your team.
It's partisan in that people who make that statement would never say it's the dems fault. On anything. Ever.
It's bullslhit because it's not true. The biggest obstacle for the dems to spend what they wanted was two democrat senators.
"Is it a problem when there is a D president and an R congress? Yes." And spending goes up
"Is it a problem when there is an R president and a D congress? No." And spending goes up a whole lot more
Lets add:
R congress, R Pres: Spending goes up a lot
D congress, D Pres: Look the fuck out as spending skyrockets
All of them (save a few lone voices, presumably) are the problem, but D's are a much bigger problem.
Broken? When the government can make money appear by magic, provide enough free stuff to keep people happy, and enough bullshit to keep them from thinking about financial consequences, sweetheart deals for favored companies and industries, and endlessly kick the fiscal can down the road, I would say it is working mighty fine.
Let me suggest that the budget process is not broken, our political system is broken. Far too many of our Representatives come from gerrymandered districts that insure their reelection. If Congress members faced more competitive elections, they would be incentivized to make the Congress work better and get budgeting done.
""Let me suggest that the budget process is not broken, our political system is broken. ""
Yes. And perhaps the political system isn't broken. It's a reflection of society. Politics has always had the capacity to be ugly, dirty, immoral, and very dishonest. Politics is the ultimate popularity contest. Perhaps the politicians are just given the people what they want. Scumbags meant to be attack dogs against political enemies to score popularity points. It brings out the worst in people.
Would this happen if elections were more competitive? We see that in more competitive elections candidates are forced to moderate their behavior and messages.
More competitive? How?
Keep this in mind when the DNC tries to cover for Biden by making it a less competitive process when they try to keep him out of debates.
I would make races more competitive by getting rid of political gerrymandering. Politicians should not get to pick their own voters. Second, I would like to see ranked choice voting (RCV). This would give smaller political parties a fighting chance.
As for Biden and the 2024 nomination process, the Republicans did the same thing in 2020, clearing the way for Trump to run again.
I hung out with some people from Iceland one night. I was told the problem with American politics was not enough parties.
I agree with that. But our system nor our citizens seem interested in expanding parties. Look at how Libertarians are treated. Or any other party other than D or R.
A mantra I've heard from a lot of people, mostly on the left is that a vote for a 3rd party or no vote is a vote for the enemy. Eg. Not voting for Hillary was a vote for Trump.
I hung out with some people from Iceland one night. I was told the problem with American politics was not enough parties.
I agree with that. But our system nor our citizens seem interested in expanding parties. Look at how Libertarians are treated. Or any other party other than D or R.
A mantra I've heard from a lot of people, mostly on the left is that a vote for a 3rd party or no vote is a vote for the enemy. Eg. Not voting for Hillary was a vote for Trump.
The answer to your question is:
YES, BOTH
Yes. And yes.
The budget process is broken BY Congress refusing to to the job.
They aren't held accountable. If they aren't held accountable they will never fix the problem. Voting does not hold them accountable. They do not hold themselves responsible, and do not answer to the people. It is contempt of the people.
They lie to the people constantly, and are hypocritical about it. You lie or withhold from them, you go to jail. They lie to us, they get reelected. It is in the national interest and the interests of the people for them to communicate with the people accurately and effectively.
They subvert the will of the people by lying and misdirection. Would we have invaded Iraq or Afghanistan if they had communicated with the people honestly and accurately? And what's with Guantanamo and foreign black sites - honest and open?
The marijuana tax stamp act, is this the same thing as Trumps January 6th efforts to divert the will of the American people? Why doesn't DOJ bring charges against those that orchestrated this? Or when politicians lie or misleads us? If there is no repercussion for politicians lying or misleading us, they will keep doing it and it will get worse.
And to remember whose side our government is on, the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world and 25% of the world's prison population. Land of the free? What a joke.
"Is the Budget Process Broken"?
I think the DEBT answers that question quite well.
Congress has yet to STOP the massive amount of debt but it's funny how you spin this to make it look like Congress trying to stop debt growth is the problem.
"Is the Budget Process Broken, or Is Congress Just Refusing To Do Its Job?"
Embrace the power of BOTH.
Let's be brutally honest here. To those in our corrupt two party system, federal appropriations are euphemistically about "return on investment". Congress spends money to generate political income. This is quid pro quo, the hand in glove relationship of wealthy special interests and government or just simply kickbacks. Congress NEVER spends our precious tax dollars efficiently or effectively because if they do, there's no money in it for them. The gross misallocation of capital spawns deficits and contributes largely to the national debt.
Or to the underlying point; "Congress NEVER spends our precious tax dollars" JUST for Constitutional purposes but instead pretends the USA has already been conquered by socialists.
"Because politics is downstream of culture, public engagement is also an effective way to ensure that Congress adheres to budgeting rules. The more the public understands the budget process, the better able voters are to hold their representatives accountable. Therefore, efforts should be made to demystify the budget process, making it accessible and understandable to the average citizen." I understand the reasoning behind politics being downstream of culture. Politics is just a sub-set of discourse. All discourse takes place in a culture. However, politics is only downstream of culture, until everyone believes that politics is downstream of culture. Once everyone believes that politics is downstream of culture, culture becomes downstream of politics. i.e. Everyone will simply dismiss all the culture that they find politically objectionable as enemy propaganda. People understanding the budgeting process would be nice. though.
But anyway, you ignored the elephant in the room: Fund raising. Politicians spend most of their time fund raising for their campaigns. If you want them to do their job and write and pass budgets. Then you need to reduce the time that they spend fund raising. The obvious way to do that would be to outlaw privately funded campaigns and give every candidate a limited budget to campaign from the government. So that there won't be any campaign fund raising at all.
Start now earning cash every month online from home. Getting paid more than ***k by doing an easy job online. I have made *** in last 4 weeks from this job. Easy to join and earning from this are just awesome.
.
.
Join this right now by follow instructions___________ http://www.join.salary49.com