Eva M. Clayton: “I oppose this bill as written, though I think it is indeed well intended. For more than half a century biennial…”

“I oppose this bill as written, though I think it is indeed well intended. For more than half a century biennial budgeting has been considered and rejected by many States. In 1940, some 44 States used biennial budgeting. Today, less than half do. The bill will cause harmful delays, reduce accuracy in forecasting and planning, and obstruct legislative control in the budget process. Under this bill, harmful delays will result because a joint resolution, as is proposed, takes longer than a concurrent resolution, as is in current law. Worse, Mr. Chairman, under this bill, from the time items within a budget are formulated to the time such items are implemented would be extended in a way that no one could be assured of accuracy. Budget cycles for Federal agencies could extend over 2- or 3-year periods, and forecasting and planning would be affected by economic swings, inflation, and unanticipated need. Fiscal control would become elusive and fanciful. And, also, many of our colleagues believe we use emergency spending measures far too often now. Imagine how often we would be tempted to use emergency spending measures if we were unable to get help to citizens in need due to the inherent sluggish budget process.”