Policy Sciences

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 313–334 | Cite as

The first decade of the Congressional Budget Act: Legislative imitation and adaptation in budgeting

  • Mark S. Kamlet
  • David C. Mowery
Article

Abstract

The influence of institutions on budgetary behavior at the federal level is the subject of this article, which examines the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. While its impact on budgetary priorities and growth seems modest at best, the Act has had a substantial impact on the process of budgetary decisionmaking, the nature of budgetary debate, and the budgetary strategies employed within Congress. These new and generally dysfunctional forms of congessional budgetary behavior are consequences of a budgetary reform that attempted to transfer many of the resource allocation procedures of the Executive branch to a legislative context. The transfer of many Executive branch budgetary procedures has led to the appearance within Congress of budgetary behavior previously confined largely to the Executive branch. The article also discusses attempts to render the congressional budget process more compatible with the legislative environment, analyzing the modifications in the original budget process that have been effected and proposed in recent years.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bozeman, B., and Straussman, J. (1982). “Shrinking budgets and the shrinkage of budget theory,” Public Administration Review 42: 509–515.Google Scholar
  2. Burkhead, J. (1947) “Budget classification and fiscal planning,” Public Administration Review 7: 228–235.Google Scholar
  3. Caiden, N. (1982) “The myth of the annual budget,” Public Administration Review 42: 16–23.Google Scholar
  4. Caiden, N. (1983). “Federal budget reform,” Public Budgeting and Finance 3: 4–23.Google Scholar
  5. Caiden, N. (1984). “The new rules of the Federal Budget game,” Public Administration Review 44: 109–118.Google Scholar
  6. Copeland, G. W. (1984). “Changes in the House of Representatives after the passage of the Budget Act of 1974,” in W. T. Wander, F. T. Hebert, and G. W. Copeland (eds.), Congressional Budgeting: Politics, Process, and Power. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Crecine, J. P. (1976) “Making defense budgets,” in Appendix IV, Commission on the Organization of the Government for the Conduct of Foreign Policy. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  8. Dodd, L. C. (1977). “Congress and the quest for power,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 1st ed. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  9. Dodd, L. C. (1981). “Congress, the Constitution, and the crisis of legislation,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
  10. Dodd, L. C., and Oppenheimer, B. I. (1981). “The House in transition: Change and consolidation,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
  11. Domenci, Senator P. (1982). Comments in Congressional Budget Office Oversight. Hearings before the Senate Budget Committee. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  12. Ellwood, J. W. (1983). “The great exception: the congressional budget process in an age of decentralization,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ellwood, J. W., and Thurber, J. A. (1977). “The new congressional budget process: The hows and whys of House-Senate differences,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 1st ed. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  14. Ellwood, J. W. and Thurber, J. A. (1981). “The politics of the Congressional budget process re-examined,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterley Press.Google Scholar
  15. Feuerbringer, J. (1985, August 3). “Deficit forecasts seen as off target,” New York Times.Google Scholar
  16. Fiorina, M. P. (1977). Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fischer, G. W. and Kamlet, M. S. (1984) “Explaining presidential priorities: The competing aspiration levels model of macrobudgetary decision making,” American Political Science Review 78: 356–371.Google Scholar
  18. Fisher, E. (1982). “The Budget Act of 1974: Its impact on spending,” paper delivered at the Conference on the Congressional Budget Process, Carl Albert Congressional Research and Studies Center, University of Oklahoma, February 12–13.Google Scholar
  19. Fisher, E. (1984) “The Congressional Budget Act: A further loss of spending control,” in W. T. Wander, F. T. Hebert, and G. W. Copeland (eds.), Congressional Budgeting: Politics, Process, and Power. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hartman, R. W. (1982). “Making budget decisions,” in J. Pechman (ed.), Setting National Priorities: The 1983 Budget. Washington DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  21. Havemann, J. (1978). Congress and the Budget. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Heclo, H. (1985). “Executive budget making,” in G. B. Mills and J. E. Palmer (eds.), Federal Budget Policy in the 1980s. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  23. Huntington, S. P. (1983). “The defense policy of the Reagan Administration, 1981–1982,” in F. Greenstein (ed.), The Reagan Presidency: an Early Assessment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Ippolito, D. S. (1980). “Budget reform, impoundment, and supplemental appropriations,” in K. A. Shepsle (ed.), The Congressional Budget Process: Some Views from the Inside. St. Louis: Center for the Study of American Business.Google Scholar
  25. Ippolito, D. S. (1981). Congressional Spending. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Ippolito, D. S. (1982). “Budget reform and Congressional-Executive relations,” paper delivered at the Conference on the Congressional Budget Process, Carl Albert Center for Congressional Research and Studies, University of Oklahoma, February 12–13.Google Scholar
  27. Kamlet, M. S., and Mowery, D. C. (1980). “The budgetary base in Federal resource allocation,” The American Journal of Political Science 4: 804–821.Google Scholar
  28. Kamlet, M. S., and Mowery, D. C. (1983). “Budgetary side payments and government growth, 1953–1968,” American Journal of Political Science 27: 636–664.Google Scholar
  29. Kamlet, M. S., and Mowery, D. C. (1984). “A comparative analysis of Congressional and Executive budgetary priorities,” paper presented at the 1984 American Political Science Association Meetings, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  30. Leiserson, A. (1948). “Coordination of Federal budgetary and appropriations procedures under the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946,” National Tax Journal 1: 118–126.Google Scholar
  31. LeLoup, L. T. (1980). “The first half-decade: Evaluating congressional budget reforms,” in K. A. Shepsle (ed.), The Congressional Budget Process: Some Views from the Inside. St. Louis: Center for the Study of American Business.Google Scholar
  32. LeLoup, L. T. (1983). “Congress and the dilemma of economic policy,” in A. Schick (ed.), Making Economic Policy in Congress. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  33. McEvoy, J. (1980). “The politics of the budget process: A view from the Senate,” in K. A. Shepsle (ed.), The Congressional Budget Process: Some Views From the Inside. St. Louis: Center for the Study of American Business.Google Scholar
  34. Masters, N. (1980). “The politics of the budget process: A view from the House,” in K. A. Shepsle (ed.), The Congressional Budget Process: Some Views from the Inside. St. Louis: Center for the Study of American Business.Google Scholar
  35. Mowery, D. C., Kamlet, M. S., and Crecine, J. P. (1980). “Presidential management of budgetary and fiscal policymaking,” Political Science Quarterly 95: 395–425.Google Scholar
  36. Mowery, D. C., and Kamlet, M. S. (1982). “Coming apart: Fiscal and budgetary policy processes in the Johnson Administration,” Journal of Public Budgeting and Finance 2: 16–34.Google Scholar
  37. Nelson, D. H. (1953). “The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1950,” Journal of Politics 15: 274–288.Google Scholar
  38. Ornstein, N. J. (1985). “The politics of the deficit,” in P. Cagan (ed.), Essays in Contemporary Economic Problems, 1985: The Economy in Deficit. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  39. Ornstein, N. J., Peabody, R. L., and Rohde, D. W. (1981). “The contemporary Senate: Into the 1980s,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
  40. Peabody, R. L. (1981). “House party leadership in the 1970s,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
  41. Pear, R. (1985, July 28). “Spending freeze favored in House despite deadlock,” New York Times.Google Scholar
  42. Price, D. E. (1981). “Congressional committees in the policy process,” in L. C. Dodd and B. I. Oppenheimer (eds.), Congress Reconsidered, 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterley Press.Google Scholar
  43. Rauch, J. (1985, July 6). “Stalemate threatening budget process as well as efforts to cut the deficit,” National Journal 1556–1559.Google Scholar
  44. Reischauer, R. D. (1983). “Mickey Mouse or Superman? The Congressional budget process during the Reagan Administration,” working paper, Changing Domestic Priorities Program, The Urban Institute, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  45. Rivlin, A. (1983). “Interview: Alice Rivlin on the Budget,” The Brookings Review 2: 25–27.Google Scholar
  46. Schick, A. (1979). Testimony in Budget Act Review. Hearings before the Task Force on the Budget Process, House Budget Committee, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  47. Schick, A. (1980). Congress and Money. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  48. Schick, A. (1981a). “The first five years of congressional budgeting,” in R. Penner (ed.), The Congressional Budget Process After Five Years. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  49. Schick, A. (1981b). Reconciliation and the Congressional Budget Process. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  50. Schick, A. (1981c). “The three-ring budget process: The Appropriations, Tax and Budget Committees in Congress,” in T. E. Mann and N. J. Ornstein (eds.), The New Congress. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  51. Schick, A.(1982). “How the budget was won and lost,” in N. J. Ornstein (ed.), President and Congress: Assessing Reagan's First Year. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  52. Schick, A. (1983). “The distributive Congress,” in A. Schick (ed.), Making Economic Policy in Congress. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Google Scholar
  53. Schick, A. (1985). “The budget as an instrument of Presidential policy,” in L. M. Salamon and M. S. Lund (eds.), The Reagan Presidency and the Governing of America. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  54. Shumavon, D. H. (1981). “Policy impact of the 1974 Congressional Budget Act,” Public Administration Review 41: 339–348.Google Scholar
  55. Sundquist, J. L. (1981). The Decline and Resurgence of Congress. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  56. Wildavsky, A. (1964). The Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  57. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Budget (1980). Budget Act Review Hearings, 96th Congress, 1st Session. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  58. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Budget (1982). Hearings on Budget Process Review, 97th Congress, 2nd Session. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  59. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Rules (1983). Hearings on the Congressional Budget Process, 97th Congress, 2nd Session. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  60. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Rules (1984a). Report of the Task Force on the Budget Process. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  61. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Rules (1984b). Report on Congressional Budget Act Amendments of 1984 (H.R. 5247). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Elsevier Science Publishers B.V 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark S. Kamlet
    • 1
  • David C. Mowery
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Social SciencesCollege of Humanities and Social Sciences, Carnegie-Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations