Sunday, December 4, 2011

Line Item Veto vs Balanced Budget Amendment

A line item veto for the president would allow him to delete costly pork barrel projects from budget bills without vetoing the entire bill, and giving the budget writing treadmill another turn of the wheel. In real life it's hard for any president to veto a highway bill or a defense appropriations bill just because Senator Fogbound has slipped in a little $1million bit of pork for his district. If the president could kill off the pork without throwing the entire department into budgetary chaos quite a bit of money could be saved.
Congress critters are dead set against a line item veto just because it would let the president deprive them of the fruits of much hard lobbying and bargaining with mere a tick of his pen.
I am dubious about the value of a balanced budget amendment. Too many ways to weasel around it. First and easiest way, over estimate tax revenues. The budget next year is "balanced" if taxes are as large as spending. Those taxes have not been collected yet, so no one REALLY knows how much tax money will come in. So they make an estimate. And since estimates are subjective, it doesn't take a very smart politician to raise the estimate enough to declare the budget "balanced". Then they can go home and not have to face worrisome questions about budget cuts.
The second way is the "off budget" scam. Declare certain activities, a state toll road authority, the state retirement system, the state university, the social security system, the federal home mortgage bank, stuff like that, to have their own budgets, independent of the state or federal budget. New Hampshire practices this to perfection. More than one half of New Hampshire spending does not come out of the general fund, it comes from a myriad of special purpose funds. It is not hard to show the general fund running a surplus by pushing expenses off on the special purpose funds, who can borrow to pay bills. The general fund can look really good when overall the state is spending more than it takes in by way of taxes.
This simple scheme works; New Hampshire newsies are so clueless as to fall for it and only report on the general fund, ignoring the overall picture. National newsies are as clueless as the New Hampshire sort.

No comments: