The House and Senate passed a budget deal to secure federal funding until the end of September 2017 last week. The House passed the funding measure by a vote of 309 to 118 on Wednesday, and the Senate followed suit 79-18. It is important to note that the Indiana delegation was divided – and not by political party – on the $1.1 trillion spending proposal.
Republican House members Jim Banks (IN-03), Trey Hollingsworth (IN-09) and Todd Rokita (IN-04) voted against the measure, while both House Democrat members André Carson (IN-07) and Pete Visclosky (IN-01) voted yes with the rest of the Hoosier delegation.
Congressman Hollingsworth released the following statement after casting his vote against the continuing resolution. “The spending bill that was brought before the House of Representatives today failed, yet again, to address the conservative principles that Hoosiers and Americans demanded to see this past November. For this reason, I voted against the $1.1 trillion spending measure that neglected critical priorities such as our nation’s nearly $20 trillion debt.”
Similarly, Congressman Banks added: “This legislation fails to properly address our $20 trillion national debt and reduce the size and scope of the federal government. As work immediately begins on next year’s spending bills, I am hopeful that Congress will follow the regular budget order and work with the Trump Administration to cut spending and change the Washington status quo.”
Despite passage of this funding measure, negotiations will begin again soon to pass a budget starting October 1 – with many of the same arguments on spending to be rehashed. But this has become all too familiar. Congress has regularly failed to meet the deadlines required by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 under both Republican and Democrat control. In fact, the last annual federal budget approved by the U.S. Senate was on April 29, 2009. The federal government has operated by enacting these series of continuing resolutions – short-term measures that keep the government running and spending money at previously adopted rates.
The Indiana Chamber believes this is a gross dereliction of duty, as the federal government has spent trillions since the last adopted budget, further adding to the debt.
What the Indiana Chamber would like to see is Congress move from a yearly (or semi-yearly) mad dash to a biennial budget system. This would take much of the politics out of the budget process and would encourage efficiency in the management, stability and predictability of federal funding, especially for Indiana. A biennial budget would also enhance congressional oversight of government operations and encourage better policy planning. Biennial budgets should occur during non-election years to promote bipartisanship (or at least lessen partisan tensions) in the budgetary process. We can dream!