As we get on the other side of this, what do you think about ideas floating around (most recently from Rep. Jake Auchincloss) to reform budget appropriations so that different agencies are funded at different intervals (every year, every other year, or every 5-10 years, for example)?
A ladder approach to funding wouldn't work within our current elective system. One party could effectively handicap an incoming/new Administration simply out of spite and the luck of a calendar.
Funding per annum? A "budget"... we used to do such things!
A more effective approach would be the removal of the Debt Ceiling which has failed to account properly for inflationary cost increases and times when "Black Swan" (Covid, 9/11, or Crash of 2008-9) pushed the debt spiraling. (There'd would need to be some legal framework in place to assure payment on that debt in a base percentage of Federal receipts in parallel with some acknowledgement that a Balanced Budget would be a requirement.)
*Note they voted to ensure Legislative budgets, so the self-dealing was an obvious priority. Not pay for Military, not ACA, not SS but so their offices had coffee money! (The Summary of Dispersals will be hillarious reading for this shutdown period.)
I agree that there are concerns that the system could be weaponized against political opposition, but that’s also a concern we’re seeing right now. Regardless of who is “at fault” for any shutdown, it is at its core the budgetary appropriations process being wielded as a political weapon.
I think if you took agencies that tend to be the most politicized — education, energy, DHHS, for example — and have their appropriations done 6-10 years at a time, you would find that it actually better insulates them from politicization.
Changing the funding mechanism won't change the politization of those Agencies, it only addresses the biases of those in Congress (lesser degree the WH occupant).
Removing the process of Presidential Nominations to head those Agencies is a more effective change. Not having the Common Knowledge crowd replace those with Specific Knowledge of process and policy would remove multiple failure points. Sustainability of programs would be the priority rather than addressing the whims of the moment.
*The Agencies you reference are recency bias related. DoD is a incestuous pool of conflicts and considerably more politically charged than DoEd.
Nothing "restores certainty" under Mr. Trump LOL. But is will hopefully end this particular battle, so we can move on to the next one. Reminds me of the old quip about Roman rule "bread and circuses" for the masses (presumably bread, if SNAP is restored), while the real rulers go about their business.
As I write this 75% of my staff, who work in Federal Contracting throughout the D.C. area, have been sitting for 6 weeks. From a budgetary aspect, it's no different than when someone loses their job and needs to balance their expenditures. The company can carry only a portion of those costs (healthcare, salary, etc) for a very limited period of time. I've deferred salary, along with other Officers, so that we can help best we can. But after 6 weeks of not getting compensation from the Feds, it's late-night laddering of what payments to make and what ones to ask for some "grace".
That isn't the position of most Federal Contractors. They let their people flounder and offer lip-service about bringing them back immediately. (For those who don't know, most of the cleaning staff for agencies are outside contractors. Hourly workers.)
Now consider Federal employees, of which my wife is one, not having received pay for 4 weeks and only partial compensation for the previous 2 weeks. Again, we're in a position to ride it out without any change to our daily lifestyle. But a member of her staff has recently gotten married and bought a house (With a spouse also employed by Feds).
There's a cost people people don't calculate in their partisan positioning. Humans.
42M needing food assistance. 1.2M Veterans not receiving help. Services that have fallen apart, S.S. is a mess for call centers and that ignores Government Data we all rely on for financial decisions.
My point? This was always a failure of leadership in BOTH parties. Legislation that is not designed to be sustainable and too often changed by the whims of the party in control.
It wasn't "caving" or "winning" based on your media choices. The reality of Innocent Violence couldn't be the theorem Congress hid behind anymore.
As we get on the other side of this, what do you think about ideas floating around (most recently from Rep. Jake Auchincloss) to reform budget appropriations so that different agencies are funded at different intervals (every year, every other year, or every 5-10 years, for example)?
A ladder approach to funding wouldn't work within our current elective system. One party could effectively handicap an incoming/new Administration simply out of spite and the luck of a calendar.
Funding per annum? A "budget"... we used to do such things!
A more effective approach would be the removal of the Debt Ceiling which has failed to account properly for inflationary cost increases and times when "Black Swan" (Covid, 9/11, or Crash of 2008-9) pushed the debt spiraling. (There'd would need to be some legal framework in place to assure payment on that debt in a base percentage of Federal receipts in parallel with some acknowledgement that a Balanced Budget would be a requirement.)
*Note they voted to ensure Legislative budgets, so the self-dealing was an obvious priority. Not pay for Military, not ACA, not SS but so their offices had coffee money! (The Summary of Dispersals will be hillarious reading for this shutdown period.)
I agree that there are concerns that the system could be weaponized against political opposition, but that’s also a concern we’re seeing right now. Regardless of who is “at fault” for any shutdown, it is at its core the budgetary appropriations process being wielded as a political weapon.
I think if you took agencies that tend to be the most politicized — education, energy, DHHS, for example — and have their appropriations done 6-10 years at a time, you would find that it actually better insulates them from politicization.
Changing the funding mechanism won't change the politization of those Agencies, it only addresses the biases of those in Congress (lesser degree the WH occupant).
Removing the process of Presidential Nominations to head those Agencies is a more effective change. Not having the Common Knowledge crowd replace those with Specific Knowledge of process and policy would remove multiple failure points. Sustainability of programs would be the priority rather than addressing the whims of the moment.
*The Agencies you reference are recency bias related. DoD is a incestuous pool of conflicts and considerably more politically charged than DoEd.
I could be on board with that. I think it’s absolutely nonsensical that the system allowed for Linda McMahon to be put in charge of education.
I would be shocked if there was a healthcare vote at all. This is a total cave by the Dems
Nothing "restores certainty" under Mr. Trump LOL. But is will hopefully end this particular battle, so we can move on to the next one. Reminds me of the old quip about Roman rule "bread and circuses" for the masses (presumably bread, if SNAP is restored), while the real rulers go about their business.
As I write this 75% of my staff, who work in Federal Contracting throughout the D.C. area, have been sitting for 6 weeks. From a budgetary aspect, it's no different than when someone loses their job and needs to balance their expenditures. The company can carry only a portion of those costs (healthcare, salary, etc) for a very limited period of time. I've deferred salary, along with other Officers, so that we can help best we can. But after 6 weeks of not getting compensation from the Feds, it's late-night laddering of what payments to make and what ones to ask for some "grace".
That isn't the position of most Federal Contractors. They let their people flounder and offer lip-service about bringing them back immediately. (For those who don't know, most of the cleaning staff for agencies are outside contractors. Hourly workers.)
Now consider Federal employees, of which my wife is one, not having received pay for 4 weeks and only partial compensation for the previous 2 weeks. Again, we're in a position to ride it out without any change to our daily lifestyle. But a member of her staff has recently gotten married and bought a house (With a spouse also employed by Feds).
There's a cost people people don't calculate in their partisan positioning. Humans.
42M needing food assistance. 1.2M Veterans not receiving help. Services that have fallen apart, S.S. is a mess for call centers and that ignores Government Data we all rely on for financial decisions.
My point? This was always a failure of leadership in BOTH parties. Legislation that is not designed to be sustainable and too often changed by the whims of the party in control.
It wasn't "caving" or "winning" based on your media choices. The reality of Innocent Violence couldn't be the theorem Congress hid behind anymore.
I totally agree with you. Your comment reflects many of the points covered on Day 31 of the shutdown in the Column " The Failure to Govern" https://www.decodeecon.com/p/the-failure-to-govern-is-an-economic?r=eikdh&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false