Confessions of a Dinosaur

The old time budget officer has been all but wiped out—the species having been deprived of its natural habitat by the great smoke cloud that began to spread after the great cataclysm of 1974 when the Budget Act began to change all the rules. This, of course, is an overstatement. But it is clear—at least from the perspective of this old dinosaur—that the job of the budget officer has changed over the years, from what many perceived of as a master of financial magic to just another serf (or supervisor) in the bureaucratic feudal system.
This is not a polemic against the Budget Act or the changes that have taken place. The only thing constant about the budget process is change. Rather, it is a discussion of how these changes have affected budget officers over the decades that I have been involved in the budget business.     

From analyst to negotiator: The OMB's new role

Dramatic changes in the executive and legislative budget processes over the last ten years have elevated the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to a new position of power and importance. Within the executive branch the budget process has become more highly centralized in the president's office; and within the Congress a similar centralization has occurred. In both branches the OMB has become the key institution for coordinating the actions of the budget-making powers. At the same time, the much-discussed “iron triangles” explored by analysts of the budgetary system have lost much of their power to control the process. Although the OMB's active involvement in the congressional budget process diminished in 1983, the institutional relationships necessary for a more centralized budget process remain and can be reactivated to deal with the predicted enormous deficits.     

Budget Process Reform: Waiting for Godot

The unraveling of the budget process described by Irene Rubin will have extraordinary consequences for the long-term budget outlook facing the nation. The retirement of the baby boom generation will prompt unprecedented and unsustainable structural fiscal imbalances for decades to come. Early policy action on the spending and revenue sides of the budget is critical to avert fiscal and economic crisis and to phase in changes in order to avoid precipitous and politically perilous actions in the future. Yet such actions constitute what amounts to a politically unnatural act, as one generation of political leaders is asked to make sacrifices in current policies benefiting future generations. Budget process reforms can serve to highlight the salience of these issues and help deal with the significant political hurdles faced by decision makers in making these intertemporal budgeting trade-offs. Ironically, the need for budget rules and processes has intensified as policy makers have become more vulnerable to polarized political parties, ever more watchful media, and mobilized interest groups. Budget rules and processes can help policy makers cope by protecting their ability to make the hard choices that will be necessary. The pressures for budget process reform will accelerate as the current financial crisis increases near-term budgetary pressures, promoting greater alignment between near-term and long-term fiscal problems.     

Budgetary constraints and municipal revenue forecasting

Conclusion The objective of this research has been to determine whether key budget participants see forecasting as making significant contributions to the budgetary process. The issue is important for at least two reasons. Budgetary tools will be used to the degree budget players perceive them as providing net budgettary benefits. Moreover, the continuing trend toward technological sophistication gives governments opportunities, red herrings or not, to incorporate the technology into the budget process. The issue is also very timely; with the demise of packaged budget reforms but not the values of budget reforms, there may be new opportunities for improving budgeting on a less grandiose, more piecemeal basis, such as using forecasts to analyze budgetary options. The findings here provide some insight into two questions concerning governmental forecasting. First, why do governments use complex methods? In support of previous research, since cities most dependent on intergovernmental aid tend to use complex forecasting, such methods may indeed be seen as a way to help cope with fiscal stress. Also, reflecting the ambiguity of current research, since cities tend to use relatively simple techniques regardless of the revenue source being forecasted, the source is at best a partial determinant of complexity. The most important predictor of complexity, however, was budget format; cities that emphasize reform methods, especially planning, tend to use the most complex forecast methods. The forecasting process was not as important as expected.Second, so what? Does forecasting influence budgetary choices? The evidence from the second part of the study suggest that it can, but within definable limits. Budget directors are more likely than councils to value outyear estimates, but both actors are much less likely to value long-term estimates. The survey results also indicate that revenue forecasts are not as useful for making political decisions as for making management decisions: the forecast is usually used as an internal document, is only sometimes intended to affect council decisions, and is not usually included in the budget. In short, the forecast may be most useful for making managerial decisions since that is what most cities want out of it. It also tends to be more useful if the budget format is less traditional. Finally, the findings indicate that forecasting may be more useful to management to the degree the council finds it politically useful. This is extremely important since it suggests that as powerful as technology may be, budgetary tools that do not meet political needs will be managerially confined.Clearly, more research is needed in this area. Does forecasting actually shape long-range plans? In the long run, will the forecasting effort change the ways cities budget? Can the availability of forecasting information strengthen one actor relative to another? These are important questions that need answering to clarify the impact of forecasting and other technologies on the budget process.     

Incremental Thinking: "Congressional Debate on the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 (Excerpts)"

Editors' Note : The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 was designed to improve the budget-making process of the national legislature. Although this new process has been in use for less than a decade, proposals for a constitutional amendment to limit the budget powers of the federal government are advancing through Congress. In assessing the potential and problems of budget reform, it would be wise to recall the expectations that animated the introduction of presidential budgeting more than 60 years ago. The following excerpts from the October 1919 debate in the House of Representatives on the legislation that ultimately became the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 have a contemporary ring. The problems are not new, and one wonders whether the solutions are as easy as some claim.     

Control and controls: A reexamination of control patterns in budget execution

Consistent choice in an inconsistent world requires processes both for rational calculation and effective control. The budgetary process incorporates both of these functions. However, students of public sector budgeting tend either to ignore budget execution or to view the time expended by budgeteers on the execution of budgets - as opposed to their construction - as a gross misallocation of resources. In the authors' opinion this perspective - or lack thereof - seriously undervalues the control function and the budgeteer's role in preventing control loss. At the same time, the authors acknowledge that budgeteers frequently misuse the controls at their disposal and that in certain cases (i.e., where competitive supply of a public service is justified and in effect) expenditure controls are redundant and serve no real purpose.Budget execution is primarily concerned with two kinds of expenditure controls, allotment controls and fund reports, and is supported by position controls. The immediate purpose of these controls is to insure that purchases are limited to the amounts and purposes specified in the budget act. However, given the typical relationship between the budget agency and the operating bureau, we argue that their ultimate function is to prevent the bureau from distorting or concealing cost and production information so as to increase its bargaining power, thereby permitting the budget office to insure that the preferences of the state are at least approximately met. Performance standards and control rules also serve to avoid inconsistency in the dealings between the budgeteer and the bureau and to stabilize expectations about the ground rules for bargaining and the likely outcomes of the bargaining process so as to reduce the costs of uncertainty to both sides.     

Improving the Budget Process in Fragile and Conflict‐Ridden States: Two Modest Lessons from Afghanistan

Both the donor community and scholars have created a cottage industry studying “fragile” states. International nongovernmental organizations that have developed indexes measuring corruption or governance have been unkind to Afghanistan. One index suggests a different and more optimistic story. The International Budget Partnership measures transparency every two years with its Open Budget Index. Afghanistan demonstrated dramatic improvement on this index between 2008 and 2012. The authors use the improvement in Afghanistan's transparency score as an entry point to explore how donors try to intervene and promote transparency as part of broader efforts in public financial management development and how legislative strengthening has also contributed to budget reform. The analysis offers a modest corrective to the overly pessimistic assessments of fragile states by showing that a fragile state can improve its budgetary transparency and enhance governance by strengthening the legislature's involvement in the budget process.     

The 1990 Budget Package: Redefining the Debate

The debate of budgeting issues in the 1980s culminated in a dramatic change in 1990—the passage of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. The negotiations leading to this agreement considered the status of the deficit and the philosophical shift from "no new taxes" to "fair taxes." It led to changes in direct spending, enforcement of budget targets, timing of the budget, sequesters usage, tax increases, and entitlement reforms.     

Do Politicians Listen to Experts? The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 and The Capacity to Budget

Last year offered a unique opportunity to compare the ideas of experts and politicians. The 1990 Budget Enforcement Act changed the federal budget process. Allen Schick's 1990 book, The Capacity to Budget, included ideas on how to improve budgeting at the federal level. A comparison is made between the new law and the new ideas in several areas of the budgetary process: deficit reduction; resource rationing; adjustment to changing expenditures; increasing budget honesty; decreasing conflict; rou-tinizing the process; integrating the parts of the budget; and balancing claims and resources.     

The President's Fiscal Year 1992 Budget: Almost Quiet on the Budgetary Front

The Fiscal Year 1992 Budget was prepared under unusual conditions. The Persian Gulf War, the piesident's disinterest in domestic issues, the bitter debate over the fiscal year 1991 budget, and the upcoming re-apportionment all combined to make this year atypical The result is a document in which the most substantial change is the cover—a patriotic red, white, and blue Inside, it uses the "one book" format of fiscal year 1991 The budget examines different interpretations of the budget deficit, implements major changes in budgetary accounting, and outlines assumptions made in preparing the budget. Overall, the budget document consolidates the gains made in 1990     

The Policy Constraints of Deficit Reduction: President Clinton's 1995 Budget

The federal budgeting process is now limited by deficit reduction policy constraints. This article examines the FY 1995 budget requests within the context of long term budget trends, changes in the federal budget process, and the recently established political and fiscal budget constraints. It further examines enactment of the Omnibus Budget Enforcement Act of 1993, the policy changes it contained, and its further tinkering with the process of budgeting. Finally the article evaluates the first budgeting process of the Clinton administration and their initiatives in deficit reduction following these policy constraints.     

The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990: The Path to No Fault Budgeting

The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, included in the controversial and comprehensive budget legislation passed by Congress in October, makes a number of significant changes in federal budgeting. It shifts the focus of the budget process from deficit reduction to spending control, provides five-year spending totals and mini-sequesters for defense, international and domestic appropriations, and puts entitlements and revenue expenditures on a pay-as-you-go basis. The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit targets have been raised substantially, Social Security surpluses taken out of the deficit calculation and allowance made for further adjustments for inflation, Operation Desert Shield, and other emergency spending, minimizing the prospect for general sequestration. OMB has been given important new estimating authority and the roles of the congressional committees involved in budgeting have been altered.     

Dealing with Uncertain Budget Forecasts

The article reviews the history of past budget projections by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The projections have been extremely inaccurate because of errors in the choice of economic and technical assumptions. The errors grow rapidly as the projection's period is lengthened. The projections are unlikely to get better soon. Therefore, the question becomes how CBO, the Congress, and the media should react to the extraordinary uncertainty that must be attached to the budget outlook. Among other things, the author suggests de-emphasizing projections made for periods longer than five years, because such projections are only a little better than random noise. He also points out the futility of aiming for rigorously enforced numerical targets for the budget balance, as was done in Gramm-Rudman and as has been proposed in various types of "lock box" legislation. The targets move around too rapidly to ever be hit.     

The Georgia Lottery and State Appropriations for Education: Substitution or Additional Funding?

This article examines the use of lottery proceeds for funding public education in Georgia, with specific focus on the state's effort to guard against fungibility of lottery proceeds. The Georgia lottery earmarks proceeds for education and Georgia is among the states requiring a high level of transparency at each stage of the budget and appropriations process. Based upon comparisons of spending before and after the lottery was put in place, we conclude that lottery spending has not been completely offset by substitution. Lottery funds appear to have stimulated additional spending in the target areas. Budget fungibility has been constrained by the transparency of the budget and appropriations process, gubernatorial commitment to supplement not supplant, the policy architecture of the lottery–for–education program, and a relatively strong state economy that renders substitution unnecessary.     

Towards more flexibility of government expenditure: Some recent developments in The Netherlands

As government revenues diminish, budgetary discretions or flexibilities have similarly decreased. A pressing question is therefore how to minimize the inflexible elements or components of a budget. This article distinguishes between technical and political inflexibilities as they are reflected in the budgetary process and argues that the latter are much more difficult to correct. After drawing some examples from studies of the Dutch national budget, the article proposes the use of reconsideration reports as a means to alleviate the politically inflexible components of the budget, as well as a way to assess government programs.I am grateful to Dr. L. J. C. M. Le Blanc, former Director General of the Budget in the Dutch Ministry of Finance for his valuable critical remarks and suggestions to earlier drafts of this article.     

Congressional Budget Reform: Impact on the Appropriations Committees

The congressional budget process has undergone several major reforms in the last twenty years: the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 and 1987 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings I and II) and the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (BEA) that have had a direct impact on the Appropriations Committees and the appropriations process. This article evaluates that impact on the decision-making capacity and power of the Appropriations Committees.     

OMB and the Budget Examiner: Changes in the Reagan Era

This is the first of a two-part retrospective on the role of the OMB budget examiner during the Reagan administration. Changes in the federal budget process, historical federal deficits and the inability of Congress to meet appropriation deadlines have significantly altered the role of OMB and its budget examiners, undermining the examiner's traditional role as program analyst and controler. This part focuses on the preparation of the president's budget and budget execution, and the compressed time in which OMB must respond to "top-down" budget requirements. The summer of 1987 is presented as a case study of the demands now placed on OMB.
Part Two, in the next issue, will focus on the budget examiner in the congressional budget process and in advocacy roles for the president.     

Linking Accounting and Budget Data: A Discourse

Although the federal government has long been required to provide a reliable linkage between its accounting and budget data, it has only recently developed tools that can provide a consistent, government‐wide solution. This article analyzes these tools by a discussion of the criteria necessary for linkage and by providing examples of certain key budget linkages. In addition, the history of the development of these linkage tools is discussed. This article was developed from ideas presented by the authors while participating on a Linking Accounting and Budget panel at the Fall 2001 American Association for Budget and Program Analysis (AABPA) Symposium.     

Reflections on Budget Systems

Several prominent budget systems of past years, such as the Planning Programming Budget System and Zero-Base Budgeting, are no longer popular as comprehensive systems, each system has had a continuing effect on current practices. This article comments on the usefulness of several features of budget systems particularly from a management perspective. It also offers several criteria for design of budget systems which, it is hoped, would help prevent some of the problems that have been encountered in the past.     

Is The National Budget Controllable?

Previous scholarly analyses of national spending have shown a penchant for incre-mentalism in interpreting changes. They have also focused almost exclusively on annual national outlays or annual expenditures. This article argues that, in many cases, budget authority figures provide a better basis for analyzing the national budget. The author gathered annual budget authority (BA) figures from fiscal years 1969 to 1993 and used this BA data for an empirical test of budget controllability. If the national budget has or has not been controlled in the recent past, then it should help us to judge whether or not it is controllable now. Five potential major budget interventions from fiscal year 1980 to 1993 were tested using an interrupted time-series and two regression models. Different intervention results are anticipated depending upon whether one has a policy perspective that is incrementalist, international systemic, or domestic political. The analysis provides more support for the domestic political perspective than for incrementalist or international systemic views. Budget authority was found to be superior to outlays for linking budget results to policy decisions. The national budget responded appropriately to policy decisions in the recent past. In this sense, the budget was controlled and we should view it as controllable.