Appropriations Testimony - Report Language

In order to provide a more complete picture of the impact of this appropriation later should be included on the impact of appropriations within each state and federal region. This should be in the appropriation Committee report rather than the legislation itself. 

Reporting should focus on where money is actually used to mandate how funds are spent. This should focus on who benefits from spending rather than who performs the work.

For example if a construction contractor from out of state is tasked to build a federal correctional institution, the report should count the spending where the facility is actually being built. Some calls are easy. National Science Foundation grants  performed at Universities are easy to identify. More complex grants may be split between states.

These data likely already exists or can be easily collected from departmental budget offices. This should be true for both planned spending and historical patterns. Committee staff would then amend these data to take into account the appropriations bill. In the future, submissions will include state and regional data in the current services budget, as well as the President’s proposals.

This information will allow the public and the committee visibility on the distributional equity of the appropriation. Again, this is not to force conformity, however it will allow adjustments to certain projects to assure adequate support for legislation. Information should be for the total appropriation in each region and state, with the number of Representatives and Senators listed for each region and state. 

Explanatory material would address any imbalances in spending (for example, the fact that Massachusetts contains a high number of research universities and associated corporations.

Next, allow me to address the budget process itself. It cannot continue on its present course. For whatever reason, bipartisanship and the desire for an effective government has been found the exception rather than the rule. This requires continuing appropriations, often until February, complicating contracting, especially new contracts. 

The Budget Control Act must be strengthened in the following way. Spending caps should be realistic rather than punitive so that inaction will not stop the appropriations process. A joint resolution would be enacted rather than a concurrent resolution, with automatic enactment of appropriations at current services levels at the beginning of the fiscal year. 

Subcommittees do not lose power, as supplemental appropriations can (and will) be enacted in those cases where action is not completed in time. This takes away the incentive to hold up the process rather than  compromise in a timely manner.

This brings us back to the utility of a regional analysis of spending. Spending priorities would be compared with VAT revenues collected in each region, with the goal of achieving balance. 

If the Appropriations Subcommittees were organized, in part, by region, such an exercise would be natural. VAT rates could be regionalized with the goal of a regionally balanced budget, although a constitutional amendment would be necessary for this to occur (such taxes are considered an excise, which must currently be uniform nationwide).

Video: https://youtu.be/0yerUsBHSeU