Supermarket sweepstakes: legislative budget scoring
For the time being, those making the Washington sausage have given themselves leave to spend whatever they think appropriate, but it was not always so, and it will not be so again.
Ready to spend the public’s money?
One day – and it may well be in the second session of this Congress, after the stimulus bill has done whatever it will have done – Congress will once again don its financial hair shirt and subject itself to scoring rules.
It’ll give you the itch to balance your budget
These rules applied for nearly fifteen years, during which time we did dramatically cut the deficit (to the point where the budget was in surplus during President Bush’s first year in office), and we shrank domestic discretionary spending as a percentage of the overall budget. As the sausage-making fest continues, it’s worth your while to understand how it will be scored, as that will dictate fiscal policy in the remaining years of President Obama’s term, by revisiting a scoring parable I wrote five years ago: Supermarket Sweepstakes:
Ever since the balanced budgets acts of 1985 and 1987, more commonly known as Gramm-Rudman-Hollings, legislation can generally be enacted only if it contributes to lowering the deficit.
Today the deficit reduction rules have relapsed, but like the Terminator, they’ll be back
I and my deficits will be back
Deficits are measured by a score against the baseline.
To play the scoring game, or even to follow it on television and in the media, you have to understand why the players act as they do.
Though programs acan be authorized for any interval and for any amount (the most popular phrase being “such sums as Congress shall appropriate”), they take life only when funded.
For that, they need appropriations, which they get from the Federal money store.
When I wrote this post, there were thirteen appropriations subcommittees; now there are twelve.
Each gets an initial budget allocation, and each subcommittee then puts together its shopping list, starting with the Chairman’s Mark.
As chair, I get to go first
Legislation is picked for a mixture of its nutrition value (sound policy) and its taste (political appeal), with Congress seeking something halfway between a balanced diet and a total pig-out.
Definitely good for us!
The legislative process is sequential, although Congress always has the power to dawdle, to stop, or even to reverse direction.
I want more spending! More spending!
Eventually the committees and both bodies arrive at the checkout counter, and get their legislation scored:
Scoring is arcane:
Do you have any idea the budget authority required for all this?
Back when the balanced budget amendment applied, scoring was critical, because legislation over the respective subcommittee caps could not be enacted.
In today’s climate, pretty much anything that can be put on the national credit card can be enacted:
Better keep printing those presidents
As a result, it will be difficult indeed to maintain any kind of fiscal discipline in the sausage fest, and the final tabulation is likely to be large indeed, and something we’ll be paying off for decades to come.
Further
There’s a lot to say about the budget
Budget Process resources from the Senate Budget Committee, Democratic Caucus. Includes a glossary, Congressional Research Service Reports, and a budget timetable.
Budget Process resources from the Senate Budget Committee, Republican Caucus. Useful, but with far fewer resources than the Democrats’ page.
“The Congressional Budget Process,” by Charles W. Johnson, House Parliamentarian, from How Our Laws Are Made, Chapter XII, published by the United States House of Representatives.
“The Congressional Budget Process,” by Robert B. Dove, Senate Parliamentarian, from Senate: Enactment of a Law, published by the United States Senate.
Glossary of Budgetary and Economic Terms from the Congressional Budget Office.
Write a comment