In a matter of minutes, the federal government avoided another shutdown. Blame is being leveled again to find out what went wrong. There is no doubt that political polarization, a dysfunctional Congress, and interference from President-elect Trump and Elon Musk are to blame.
But the bigger problem is that the budget process is broken and needs to be made whole. American history may be a story of budget amendments gone awry, but something needs to be done.
A starting point would be to repeal the 1917 law that established the debt ceiling, and then adopt legislation that would allow for an automatic continuing settlement if a budget is not agreed in a timely manner.
political scientist VO key and Aaron Wildavsky I once proclaimed that budgeting is all about priorities. It's about what we value and how much money we're willing to spend to achieve our goals. But there is rarely agreement on what we value. With 100 senators, 435 representatives, and a president, they are motivated to spend to please their voters, but not to impose new taxes.
As a result, the U.S. government has constant budget problems. There was no federal budget before World War I. When money was needed, the president asked for it and Congress cut the checks. This process worked when government spending was modest, but economic changes and World War I pointed to the need to set aside budgets so that governments could spend more efficiently. It was done.
of Second Free Public Debt Act of 1917 Placed a statutory cap on the U.S. debt and required Congress to vote to raise the debt ceiling. It was believed that the cap would impose fiscal discipline. Next, Budget Act of 1921 This was the first effort to create a budget process for the American government. It required the Congressional Budget Committees to centralize the budget process and required the Executive Branch's Office of Budget (later the Office of Management and Budget) to bring some order to federal spending.
But the Great Depression and World War II tested the limits of the 1917 and 1921 laws. Subsequently, the Vietnam War and the Great Society programs of the Johnson era combined to generate significantly higher federal spending and conflicts over it. President Richard Nixon refused to spend the funds appropriated by Congress, which led to the bill's passage. Congressional Budget and Forfeiture Act of 1974.
This law is the basis of modern federal budgeting. It created the Congressional Budget Office, mandated a date and time for budget passage, and required a presidential budget. The president proposes a budget, and Congress is required to pass an annual budget by October 1 of each year.
If a budget is not passed, either the government will shut down or Congress and the president will agree to a resolution to continue funding the government. Continuing resolutions are merely a temporary funding mechanism agreed to to keep the government funded until Congress and the President reach agreement on a budget or another continuing resolution.
This law came into effect in 1976. Good in theory, but it's never really worked. The debt ceiling has not achieved its purpose either. A good budget process only works if there is agreement on values and spending. But the two parties have become even more polarized, with increasing disagreements over taxing and spending priorities. Since 1976, only four budgets have passed on time (the last one was in 1996). For the most part, governments operate on standing resolutions.
Since 1976, 22 Budget or funding gap10 of which led to furloughs of federal employees. Moreover, only from 1998-2001 Did this process produce a balanced budget? Legislation aimed at bringing order and discipline to the budgeting process has failed.
The lesson of the past 50 years is that polarization is only part of the problem. The failure to pass a budget and the threat of a government shutdown due to a debt ceiling hike are reinforcing brinkmanship rather than timely compromise.
Over time, other gimmicks will also be added, such as: Presidential item veto,suggestion Toward a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget and Gramm-Rudman Act of 1985 Mandating automatic budget cuts failed to bring about fiscal discipline. There is no sign that polarization will diminish in the short term or that consensus on spending priorities will emerge.
The only solution is to accept reality and do damage control. Shutting down the government or playing games with the budget is expensive. Two reforms are needed as partial fixes.
First, Congress would have to pass a law that would override the authorization to raise the debt ceiling. Second, if the budget does not go into effect by October 1, the law should require that the current budget plus inflation automatically go into effect until Congress replaces it with a permanent budget.
Although these solutions have many problems, their main strengths are that they remove the threat of a government shutdown, remove the ability of some extremists to usurp the current process, and ensure greater stability in the government process. It is to do.
david schultz He is a Distinguished University Professor and Winston Volkers Endowed Distinguished Chair of Political Science at Hamline University.
