Chow I-houng

PAD300

Professor Michael Theno

Oct 31,1995

                         P R E S E N T A T I O N

 

                               SUBJECT:

 

                      The Lack of a Budgetary Theory

 

1.Foreword:  

 The subject which we are going to discuss in this class was written by V. O.Key, Jr. in 1940, when U.S. had practiced, so called, executive budgeting in government  budget two decades ago. The paper  mainly discuss about the basis, another term -budgetary theory-in the viewpoint of the author, of the allocation of public resources among different purposes wisely , to the end that the budget may most truly reflect the public interest. Before we discuss the context of the paper directly, I would like to explore some basic  functions of public budgeting and to give some facts about the movement  of budgetary reforms practicing in U.S. from the embryonic form of  executive budgeting in 1900s to the legislative budgeting at the present. At the interim of the discussion of the context I preferably interrupt and add some papers of later writers about arguing and supporting the points  suggesting in the context. Constraining both in time and non-mother-of-tongue speech , I would not explain supporting materials in detail ,but not  missing the point , and use my pc notebook as a pedagogic tool in which  there is a program using to show a larger portion of my presentation literally and verbally, albeit I coded and compiled in Chinese setting. Finally, I would like to give my point of views about the question the author raised in the conclusion.   

2.Framework: 

 Functions of public budgeting:(PAD300-1)

 1.Define in terms of the moving factors toward adopting executive budgeting 
   in U.S.

 2.Define in terms of Richard A. Musgrave's economic values from government.

 3.Define in terms of Robert Anthony's identification of distinct 

   administrative processes.

 4.Define in terms of Buchanan's public choice theory for political factors

 
  dominating in the budgetary process in the representative democracy. 

 Budgetary Reforms in U.S.:

 1.Control Emphasis:

   1.Executive Budgeting(1900-

   2.Functional Budgeting(1948-

 2.Management Emphasis:

   1.Perfromance Budgeting(1949-

   2.Program Budgeting(1949-

   3.MBO's Budgeting(1973-

 3.Planning Emphasis:

   1.Multi-year Budgeting and Projections(1961-

   2.Planning,Programming,Budgeting System(1965-

   3.Zero-Based Budgeting(1974-

 4.Legislative Budgeting(1974-

 5.Ballot-Box Budgeting(1992- 

3.Summary of the Context:(PAD300-3)-See handout 

4.Later Writer's Opinion on the Budgetary Theory:(PAD300-4)-See handout 

5.Conclusion (PAD300-5) 

 From presently unsatisfactory preparation of executive budget and sometimes incremental or decremental practices of budget makers in the review of estimates, we could surely say that the theory of budget in allocating resources among human purposes still need to be explored just as the author mentioned. In the end, I would like to give the definition of public budgeting of my own as follows: Public budgeting is the political and financial aspect in the process of allocating resources from the popular among goals set by the popular in achieving the best public interest in an efficient, effective, and political way. Also I would like to point out that there is still a way to achieve the best public interest through the budget process. Even in the recent years U.S. budget deficits still run very high at the continuing pace and there is full of cynics about the budget process to achieve the best public interest in the hurry and hustle of political power struggle. Think about changing the budget process in lessening the political influences in budget decision, while the abatement of political power does not mean to hinder the invaluable process of the democracy. Maybe shed some light on it. In lessening the political influences in budget decision, we could hopefully develop an economical analysis and method for allocation of public resources that bests to achieve the public interest. In my country, Republic of China on Taiwan, we place largely the responsibility of budget on the executive side but the legislative still have power to review the budget, that is, the legislative can reduce the executive budget but can not increase the budget. In Japan, they also have same kind of measures in different forms which are stipulating the responsibility of budget preparation belonging to the executive side while the Diet still uses the control power of adding, altering, and cutting the budget with respects to the power of the budget-preparation and -execution under the executive authorities. Although the two countries budget system are partly adopting from the U.S. ,the clear-cut responsibility in budget decisions still needs desperately in U.S. in order to avoiding the "no-fault" budgeting that leads to the federal budget deficits.