senate Bill S. 150
Should Congress Switch to a Two-Year Budget?
Argument in favor
If Congress transitions to a two-year biennial budget it will give lawmakers more time for oversight and bring greater transparency to the budgeting and appropriations process. The switch could reduce the likelihood of government shutdowns.
12/23/2015
Make it amendable after a year as long as house, senate, and president agrees to changes.
12/31/2015
I'd like to see multi-year budget proposals & have (minor) adjustment sessions at least every 6 months, at most every quarter. In the past, we used to approve budgets for several years at a time for the betterment of the United States; more used to get done *and* funded. Now that our forecast models have improved, this should be easy to accomplish to streamline Congress & reduce the impact the budget process has on governing America.
···
02/02/2016
Many states already function using a biannual budget process, for most it appears to work quite well. I don't believe that the criticism that this change would make the Federally Government slow to respond to fiscal crises holds much water, as a two year budget process would not prevent Congeress from reconvening in the event of a crisis to make adjustments. The possibility of greater oversight and longer review is a substantial benefit which is in no way counterbalanced by the smaller problem of addressing potential future problems in off budget years. In other words, the benefits far outweigh the liabilities.
Argument opposed
Congress is going to be inefficient and dysfunctional whether they prepare the federal budget two years at a time or not. Not only that, but it is hard to forecast how much tax revenue will be available two years in advance and how it should be spent.
···
12/23/2015
Congress needs to get off its ass and do the job they were elected to do. That includes passing a budget that is best for the country, not just their Corporate and billionaire puppet masters! This bill would just give them longer timeframes to act like spoiled toddlers!
···
12/23/2015
So instead of dealing with current problems and coming up with some sort of compromise and or solution, let's just kick the can down the road and deal with it later!! Sounds like Congressional logic to me. And how does tabling the debate for later provide transparency? If transparency is your real goal then make the budget a matter of public record, then anybody with a library card or a smart phone can see the budget line item for line item. And add who voted for and against what proposals so that the general public can see where the conflict lies, and there you have it, instant transparency! As opposed to this procrastination bill.
···
12/23/2015
This sounds like it will give Congress more time for fundraising instead of doing their job.
Make it amendable after a year as long as house, senate, and president agrees to changes.
Congress needs to get off its ass and do the job they were elected to do. That includes passing a budget that is best for the country, not just their Corporate and billionaire puppet masters! This bill would just give them longer timeframes to act like spoiled toddlers!
So instead of dealing with current problems and coming up with some sort of compromise and or solution, let's just kick the can down the road and deal with it later!! Sounds like Congressional logic to me. And how does tabling the debate for later provide transparency? If transparency is your real goal then make the budget a matter of public record, then anybody with a library card or a smart phone can see the budget line item for line item. And add who voted for and against what proposals so that the general public can see where the conflict lies, and there you have it, instant transparency! As opposed to this procrastination bill.
This sounds like it will give Congress more time for fundraising instead of doing their job.
I'd like to see multi-year budget proposals & have (minor) adjustment sessions at least every 6 months, at most every quarter. In the past, we used to approve budgets for several years at a time for the betterment of the United States; more used to get done *and* funded. Now that our forecast models have improved, this should be easy to accomplish to streamline Congress & reduce the impact the budget process has on governing America.
Why should we give them MORE TIME TO PROCRASTINATE?! They need to quit focusing on coming up with feel-good legislation and pointless resolutions and get their PRIORITIES straight!
Many states already function using a biannual budget process, for most it appears to work quite well. I don't believe that the criticism that this change would make the Federally Government slow to respond to fiscal crises holds much water, as a two year budget process would not prevent Congeress from reconvening in the event of a crisis to make adjustments. The possibility of greater oversight and longer review is a substantial benefit which is in no way counterbalanced by the smaller problem of addressing potential future problems in off budget years. In other words, the benefits far outweigh the liabilities.
It matters not if the requirement is one year, two years or five years, these yahoos in congress will still dilly dally around and not agree with a budget based on ideology. They are just kickin the can down the road. They need to prioritize and get the Budget out on time instead of wasting time and money on junk nice to have goodie Feelie, projects.
The first budget bill that needs passed is one that requires a balanced budget.
Two years my goodness haven't we been on hold long enough. Now is the time to get things done. If our politicians haven't noticed we're in a civil war a fight for America. This two year is like dogging the battle or tuck tail and run.
This will give Congress more time to screw up. Next we will here about a "next" 4 year budget, voted on by opposition party in power. Do it correctly the first time by electing Ted Cruz.
No it seems federal congress has too much on their plate. One thing to do is have the welfare handled by the states, municipalities, and the people. This will decrease Federal taxes and federal bureaucracy and allow federal congress to focus on lowering the debt, foreign policy, monetary policy, and preserving liberties.
It seems we face this drama of a possible shut down too often. We need to be able to be more responsible with how money should be spent and going over the budget two years at a time will give them more time to discuss how the money should be spent m and reduce the chance of having disagreements that will cause pointless shutdowns.
What makes us think this will help them do the budget any better???
Requiring Congress to make a budget only once every two years would only make them even lazier than ever before. Not only that, but it is practically impossible to predict if a budget will be able to pay for two full years as stock markets and tax revenue can be very volatile and unpredictable.
This sounds a lot like procrastination. I fully support being thorough, but this seems negligent.
They haven't had a budget in six and a half years, so why do you think two years would be any different? Why don't we do this, if congress can't come up with a budget like the Constitution requires then they should give up some of their pay. Put that money into a central fund that no one can touch and then every presidential election have a list of charities put on the ballet and have the people decide what charity gets the money. If congress loses some of their pay for not doing their job then maybe they will work together to come up with a budget.
Giving them an easy way out from doing their job shouldn't be allowed.