Hearing of the Committee on Rules
"Biennial Budgeting: A Tool for Improving Government Fiscal Management and Oversight"
Chairman, Committee on Rules
The hearing will come to order. This is the second of three hearings being held by the Rules Committee to examine various proposals for establishing a two-year budget and appropriations cycle.
On February 16, we heard from 16 of our colleagues in the House, including Speaker Dennis Hastert and the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Appropriations Committee. This morning we will hear the perspectives of the executive branch and congressional support agencies. At our final hearing next Thursday, the Committee will receive testimony from former Congressman Lee Hamilton, former OMB Director Leon Panetta, members of academia, and representatives of budget reform organizations, state legislatures and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The prepared statements of our witnesses along with the transcripts of the hearings can be found on the Rules Committee's web site at www.house.gov/rules. This hearing can also be heard live on the Internet by going to our web site.
Anyone who follows budget process issues is aware of the fact that, at the end of the last session of Congress, a bipartisan group of 245 House Members introduced a resolution calling for the enactment of a biennial budget process in the second session of the 106th Congress. As we move forward with this process, our goal is to gather all of the technical expertise possible to develop consensus legislation that will be successful in streamlining the budget process, enhancing programmatic oversight, and strengthening the management of government programs and bureaucracies.
As I mentioned, at our first hearing on February 16, we heard from House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who called on us to work with the House Budget Committee and with the Senate in a bipartisan fashion to produce a biennial budget package for the House to consider this year.
Appropriations Committee Chairman Bill Young said this is a good time to look at implementing a biennial budget process but urged us not to load up any legislation with other controversial budget process proposals.
We also heard from a number of opponents of biennial budgeting, such as Representative David Obey. He raised concerns that biennial budgeting will undermine Congress' Constitutional responsibilities, increase the size and number of supplemental appropriations, and lock Congress into policy decisions that will need to be changed as a result of changing circumstances.
I happen to believe the case for biennial budgeting is overwhelming. While not a panacea, I believe it will improve government fiscal management, programmatic oversight, budget stability and predictability, and government cost effectiveness.
To hear the perspectives of the executive branch and congressional support agencies, I am pleased to welcome OMB Director Jack Lew, Congressional Budget Office Director Dan Crippen, General Accounting Office Associate Director Sue Irving, and CRS Specialist Lou Fisher.
