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.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bozeman, B., and Straussman, J. (1982). “Shrinking budgets and the shrinkage of budget theory,” Public Administration Review 42: 509–515.
Burkhead, J. (1947) “Budget classification and fiscal planning,” Public Administration Review 7: 228–235.
Caiden, N. (1982) “The myth of the annual budget,” Public Administration Review 42: 16–23.
Caiden, N. (1983). “Federal budget reform,” Public Budgeting and Finance 3: 4–23.
Caiden, N. (1984). “The new rules of the Federal Budget game,” Public Administration Review 44: 109–118.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Domenci, Senator P. (1982). Comments in Congressional Budget Office Oversight. Hearings before the Senate Budget Committee. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
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.
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.
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.
Feuerbringer, J. (1985, August 3). “Deficit forecasts seen as off target,” New York Times.
Fiorina, M. P. (1977). Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven: Yale University Press.
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.
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.
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.
Hartman, R. W. (1982). “Making budget decisions,” in J. Pechman (ed.), Setting National Priorities: The 1983 Budget. Washington DC: The Brookings Institution.
Havemann, J. (1978). Congress and the Budget. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
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.
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.
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.
Ippolito, D. S. (1981). Congressional Spending. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
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.
Kamlet, M. S., and Mowery, D. C. (1980). “The budgetary base in Federal resource allocation,” The American Journal of Political Science 4: 804–821.
Kamlet, M. S., and Mowery, D. C. (1983). “Budgetary side payments and government growth, 1953–1968,” American Journal of Political Science 27: 636–664.
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.
Leiserson, A. (1948). “Coordination of Federal budgetary and appropriations procedures under the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946,” National Tax Journal 1: 118–126.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Mowery, D. C., Kamlet, M. S., and Crecine, J. P. (1980). “Presidential management of budgetary and fiscal policymaking,” Political Science Quarterly 95: 395–425.
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.
Nelson, D. H. (1953). “The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1950,” Journal of Politics 15: 274–288.
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.
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.
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.
Pear, R. (1985, July 28). “Spending freeze favored in House despite deadlock,” New York Times.
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.
Rauch, J. (1985, July 6). “Stalemate threatening budget process as well as efforts to cut the deficit,” National Journal 1556–1559.
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.
Rivlin, A. (1983). “Interview: Alice Rivlin on the Budget,” The Brookings Review 2: 25–27.
Schick, A. (1979). Testimony in Budget Act Review. Hearings before the Task Force on the Budget Process, House Budget Committee, Washington, DC.
Schick, A. (1980). Congress and Money. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
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.
Schick, A. (1981b). Reconciliation and the Congressional Budget Process. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
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.
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.
Schick, A. (1983). “The distributive Congress,” in A. Schick (ed.), Making Economic Policy in Congress. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
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.
Shumavon, D. H. (1981). “Policy impact of the 1974 Congressional Budget Act,” Public Administration Review 41: 339–348.
Sundquist, J. L. (1981). The Decline and Resurgence of Congress. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Wildavsky, A. (1964). The Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little Brown.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Earlier versions of this article were delivered at the Workshop on Budgetary Control in the Public Sector, Brussels, Belgium, October 13–14, 1983, the meetings of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, October, 1983, and the meetings of the American Political Science Association, September, 1983. Allen Schick, Robert X. Browning, Alex Hicks, Robert Strauss, John R. Hibbings, Evelyn Brodkin, and Rod Kiewiet provided helpful comments, and Pamela Reyner provided secretarial assistance. All remaining deficiencies are the responsibilities of the authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kamlet, M.S., Mowery, D.C. The first decade of the Congressional Budget Act: Legislative imitation and adaptation in budgeting. Policy Sci 18, 313–334 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00135917
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00135917