Friday, January 22, 2010
Rule making and rule breaking.
I am not worried about the incremental approach that Wildavsky discusses. I worry more about the constant state of flux the rules of budgeting seems to be in. Rubin discusses the major changes in budgeting over the years. I find it very disturbing that the legislature is constantly reforming the rules to fit their situation. I understand the desires to curb deficits and the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings act. What I don't understand is why then, there is so much effort put into circumventing these rules. Then effort goes into reforming the rules. Now the budget is so large and complicated I wonder what the point is of actually spending time and money on making rules. It seems that all of the actors do what they want, regardless of what the rules are. Each committee and each congressman only pays attention to those aspects that affect them the most. It seems to me that when budgeting is so complicated that our elected representatives cannot follow rules and cannot read the legislation they are passing, then sweeping changes are needed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that sweeping changes need to be made. The system is very complicated and as soon as one person doesn't get what they want, they go around the system to make a hole for what they are pushing or need. This is why we need elected officials who aren't out to for their own agendas but are instead concerned about the people who voted for them.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that no matter what level of government one is in time is important to what the outcome of your budget will be. I mean for instance the stimulus package that passed in early 2009 was so long that our elected officials didn't have time to read it but they were supposed to vote on it in a matter of hours. How can we expect these people to make good decisions on our behalf if they don't even have the time to comprehend what are in the bills they are voting for?
I am not sure what kind of reforms can be implemented to put a stop to this chaos, but it all starts with the legislatures.
I also agree that sweeping changes should be implemented. Unfortunately, to execute change, both the legislative and executive branches need to be able to agree on the best solution for managing public funds. As we have read, normally one branch has more power over the budget than the other. The less empowered branch seems to be interested in reform only when an opportunity to gain more control over the budget is presented.
ReplyDeleteI think citizens need to be more attentive to the processes and politics behind budgeting, especially at the state and local levels. In many cases, I would imagine that state legislators are pushing for programs that will benefit their constituents because they feel that will lead to reelection. However, while certain programs may benefit specific segments of the population, they may not be the most beneficial for the entire state’s population. Therefore, I think an essential part to budget reform is to discourage domination in the legislature by officials elected from more influential or powerful regions.
I agree with Randy, LeAnn and Meghan. Randy made a good point when he talks about legislators spending so much time on making and breaking rules for budget-making that the budget itself is so cumbersome that no one can understand what is going on anymore. At what point do the constituents say that enough is enough and just vote out everyone in congress and start over? It seems like most times legislatures circumvent the formal rules when it pleases them.
ReplyDelete