There are some things that We can do to save our country. I am writing a series of short posts to suggest some changes (that no one is really talking about) that would have a profound impact on the country.
Modest Proposal #1: Zero Based Budgeting
Since 1974, Congress has used baseline budgeting to plan future spending. Baseline budgeting assumes a certain growth for every project and program in perpetuity, regardless of efficacy or relevance. This has inexorably led to the explosion in the size of government, government spending, and government debt.
Moreover, with budget increases planned into future budgets, any attempt to even reduce the rate of growth of any program is falsely labeled a “cut” and used as a rhetorical bludgeon on anyone that even tries to reduce the growth of government.
If Republicans take control of Congress, it should be a priority to undo the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and institute “zero based budgeting” as the new method. This would require each and every program and bureaucracy to justify its budget every year from zero.
Will this make budgeting and spending more difficult? Yes. And that is exactly as it should be.
There are proposals to do just that. Here is one by Rep. Dennis Ross of Florida. In addition to the zero based budget, Ross’ bill would require
First, every department and agency of the federal government, when submitting their budget request each year, must provide a description of each activity for which a department or agency receives an appropriation.
Second, every department and agency of the federal government must cite to Congress the legal basis under which they may lawfully receive an appropriation.
Third, every department and agency of the federal government must offer three alternative funding levels. Additionally, two out of the three must be for less money than the prior budget year. This innovative budget mechanism will allow agencies and department leaders to help Congress cut waste, or risk Congress taking an across the board approach. Tell us where to cut or we will cut for you.
Lastly, for each activity a department of agency requests money for, they must provide a summary of its cost effectiveness and efficiency to the taxpayer. This will allow Congress and taxpayers to judge whether we are truly getting our money’s worth.
This would be a good start.
August 23, 2012 at 4:47 pm
Yes, please!
August 23, 2012 at 5:37 pm
I think we should use base 16 budgeting because then no body would have any idea how big the deficit really is. "Oh, we have a deficit of e8d4a510000 dollars? Big deal!"
August 23, 2012 at 10:48 pm
This is no different from how every other organization budgets. Justify, use, or lose.
August 24, 2012 at 1:14 am
YES!
I teach part-time at a public college- our raises (part-timers have no benefits at all- the big $ is in administration…but I digress) are locked in- no matter the economy. So every year, the state is in a MAJOR hole. We would have been fine in they had frozen raises for 3 years (and actually saved jobs- out of 18 in my department, only 5 have classes this semester)
August 24, 2012 at 5:58 pm
I agree in principle, but I think a better start would be to a) cancel all spending increases, and b) mandate a 30% across the board cut per year, to each and every budget. In about 4 years, we would be back to the levels of 2000, which were still obscene.
Then apply the zero-based budget approach, with the 30% cut as a ceiling. Going above that ceiling should require a 2/3 majority of both houses, AND a presidential signature.
Government is subject to the same reality as we who fund it: you cannot spend what you do not have.
August 24, 2012 at 7:00 pm
I agree with William here, but it must be stated that this would require an amendment to the constitution. Back in June of 2005 I posted this idea on my blog. To summarize from that:
1) A requirement that Spending increases by no more than the increase in the rate of inflation plus the increase in population, on a year-by-year basis,
2) A two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress in order to increase Spending above that rate, good for only one year,
3) A two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress in order to increase Taxes, good for only one year,
4) One half of all yearly surpluses automatically goes toward Nation Debt relief, the other half being returned to Taxpayers. Any annual shortfalls automatically trigger an across-the-board spending reduction if Congress does not act within a timely manner to implement tailored budget cuts,
5) A Presidential Line-Item-Veto (as 40+ States already have in their own Constitutions for their Governors), with a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress in order to override the veto.
6) A Ban on all non-germane, rider amendments to Congressional legislative bills.
Given the massive spending that has occurred over the last decade or so, I would also agree that spending levels must be brought to year 2000 levels, and then annually adjusted from there.
August 24, 2012 at 8:17 pm
I agree, Trubador, but with some qualifications:
– 30% for 4 years is only a start. We have all of the Great Society and later to undo.
– "non-germane" is a problematic usage here. I would say no riders not specific to the primary function of the legislation, but even that may be too loose.
– given current trends, I am also inclined to favor a total page limit, and a numeric limit to the number of statues modified by the bill.