Congress and the federal budget

Faith Rivers James, associate dean for experiential learning and leadership, and professor of law, Elon University School of Law [/caption]Elon Law Associate Dean Faith Rivers James served as Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor to the Majority Leader of the United States House of Representatives. She was Budget Associate to the Majority Leader during the Omnibus Deficit Reduction Act of 1993. Her commentary on current efforts in Congress to establish a budget plan follows: 

“This week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution that establishes the government’s budget plan for 2016 through 2025. Although replete with numbers, the resolution is essentially a policy document that establishes spending priorities and sets fiscal management goals. As such, many refer to the budget as a ‘moral document’ that reflects the nation’s values. By contrast, others view the budget resolution as theatre designed to promote political themes and aspirations. 

“In an effort to force ‘Washington to live within its means,’ the Republican Leadership stated that the ‘balanced budget’ plan will eliminate the deficit over the next decade, repeal the Affordable Care Act known as ‘Obamacare,’ protect military spending, and eliminate wasteful spending on other government programs.  

“Matching President Obama’s military budget dollar for dollar, defense spending exposed a rift between deficit and defense hawks who differed over whether $22.5 billion of the increase in defense spending would have to be offset with savings. And even though the budget met President Obama’s request, Democrats and Republicans noted that the budget would charge 14 percent of the military spending to a contingency account used for overseas war expenses, and allow this component of defense spending to proceed ‘off budget’ – outside of authorized caps on government spending. 

“Democratic Leaders decried the resolution’s $5.5 trillion cuts in projected government spending, asserting that the budget ‘disinvests in the future of our nation by making deep cuts to education, infrastructure, and scientific research.’ Progressive advocates like the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities point out that the majority of the budget resolution’s spending cuts come programs and tax credits that assist moderate and low income families with health care, food assistance, and college education needs.  

“A provision to repeal ‘Obamacare’ will likely encounter a procedural hurdle in the Senate under the ‘Byrd Rule’ – a point of order that would halt efforts to make broad legislative reforms in a reconciliation bill that is only designed to deal with revenues and spending provisions. A supermajority vote would be required to overcome the procedural point of order in order for the Senate to proceed to consideration of the budget bill. 

“In the final House vote, the Republican budget resolution prevailed over the objection of 26 party members. Though the party split surprised many, it is not without precedent. Nearly twice that many House Democrats voted against President Clinton’s first budget reconciliation act in 1993. As the process proceeds from resolution to reconciliation, the budget’s aspirational goals will be reconciled to policy changes that will specify how spending – and reductions in spending will fall. Then, the budget will move beyond ‘values’ or ‘theatre’ and get down to brass tacks. Once the numbers are attached to policy changes, legislators will reveal their values with their votes.”  

More information about Associate Dean Faith Rivers James is available here.