The federal budget: Here we go again
Not since 1997 has Congress passed all 12 separate appropriations bills to fund government, failing miserably to abide by its own rules. Now, with the clock ticking down to the new fiscal year on Oct. 1— an accelerated process because of lawmakers' lavish vacation time between now and then — another pork-stuffed, corporate-wealthfare-plied, inexcusable omnibus budget bill is in the works.
Expect the perfunctory theatrics after Congress returns from a five-week recess that begins Aug. 1. Lawmakers will have about 10 working days in September before they break again for a month of campaigning, Reuters reports.
What the public ends up with is a rushed, overstuffed spending bill, or a stagnant contingency plan, that turns a blind eye to this year's projected half-trillion-dollar deficit, according to a Heritage Foundation analysis.
At work is something more disingenuous than just political maneuvering by both parties.
“Lawmakers no longer miss budget deadlines; they breach them deliberately and regularly, obliterating any notion of a fiscal year as the government runs on a series of temporary spending measures,” says Patrick Louis Knudsen, who was policy director of the House Budget Committee for 20 years.
Only on Capitol Hill can the public's representatives ignore this key job responsibility without repercussion. That won't change until voters change Congress — by ridding it of those who refuse to do their jobs.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Sunday pops
- The Box
- Expanding Medicaid: Gov.-elect Wolf embraces a false premise
- Saturday essay: A manger’s light
- The regulatory state: EPA picks a fight
- Ford City’s solution: Good side to cop cuts
- The Kathleen Kane chronicles: New and serious questions are being raised about the Pa. attorney general
- Picking winners & losers: Stop the idiocy
- Pension reform should not be linked to a natural gas extraction tax
- The Thursday wrap
- Union ‘fairness’: The dues racket