Upsetting National Priorities: The Reagan Administration's Budgetary Strategy

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 1293-1307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark S. Kamlet ◽  
David C. Mowery ◽  
Tsai-Tsu Su
Keyword(s):  
Federal Budget ◽  
Defense Spending ◽  
Domestic Spending ◽  
Tax Cuts ◽  
Budgetary Priorities

We use simulations based on a multiequation model of federal budgetary outcomes to assess the Reagan administrations impact on the federal budget during fiscal years 1982–86. Reagan's aggregate budget priorities represent a significant departure from the priorities of prior postwar administrations. The bulk of this shift in priorities had occurred by fiscal 1984. Defense spending and uncontrollable domestic spending were higher, and spending on domestic controllable programs lower under Reagan than they would otherwise have been. The distinctiveness of Reagan's budgetary priorities can be attributed to his tax cuts and—far from a strategy of “starving the budget by reducing revenues”—to a failure to allow fiscal pressures to restrain spending. The model projects that without tax cuts Reagan's predecessors would have spent no less on defense than Reagan. Cutting taxes increased the deficit by about $400 billion cumulatively during fiscal years 1982–86 and reduced expenditures by roughly $30 billion.

scholarly journals A Modest Proposal To Balance The Federal Budget

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 669
Author(s):  
Robert B. Matthews
Keyword(s):  
Social Insurance ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Federal Budget ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
The United States ◽  
Defense Spending ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Consumption Tax ◽  
Primary Driver ◽  
Us Federal Government

The total debt of the United States (US) federal government now exceeds annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This level has historically proved problematic in other countries. The primary driver of the debt is a federal budget deficit that now exceeds $1 trillion per year. Despite forecasts of dire consequences, the deficit and debt have not been controlled, as efforts to make meaningful reductionsincluding plans developed by the bipartisan Bowles-Simpson and Domenici-Rivlin groupshave so far fallen prey to infighting in the political process. This paper examines one approach to eliminate the annual deficit, balance the federal budget, and reduce the federal debt. This approach increases tax revenues with a flat income tax applied to a broader tax base plus a consumption tax. Health and welfare spending is reformed using the Boortz-Linder Prebate and the Bismarck social-insurance health care plan to provide a more comprehensive safety net. Defense spending is reduced by making greater use of reserve forces following the model of Sweden, Switzerland, and Israel, by reducing overseas deployments, and by reforming procurement. Many unnecessary or counterproductive activities are cancelled, transferred to the states, or privatized. Social security is placed on a sound footing for the future. These proposals are based in large part upon programs and procedures that have produced positive results in other countries. This approach is offered not as the only or best solution, but rather to indicate that solution is possible and to lead to further discussion.

scholarly journals Trust in institutions: Narrowing the ideological gap over the federal budget

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim-Lee Tuxhorn ◽  
John W. D'Attoma ◽  
Sven Steinmo
Keyword(s):  
Federal Budget ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Trust In Government ◽  
Trust In Institutions ◽  
The Government ◽  
Budgetary Decisions ◽  
Spending Cuts ◽  
Population Based Survey ◽  
Tax Cuts

Do liberals and conservatives who trust the government have more similar preferences regarding the federal budget than liberals and conservatives who do not? Prior research has shown that the ideological gap over spending increases and tax cuts narrows at high levels of trust in government. We extend this literature by examining whether the dampening effect of trust operates when more difficult budgetary decisions (spending cuts and tax increases) have to be made. Although related, a tax increase demands greater material and ideological sacrifice from individuals than tax cuts. The same logic can be applied to support for spending cuts. We test the trust-as-heuristic hypothesis using measures of revealed budgetary preferences from a population-based survey containing an embedded budget simulation. Our findings show that trusting liberals and conservatives share similar preferences toward spending cuts and tax increases, adding an important empirical addendum to a theory based on sacrificial costs.

A Tale of Two Tax Cuts

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Waterhouse
Keyword(s):  
Reagan Administration ◽  
Federal Budget ◽  
Contentious Politics ◽  
Organized Labor ◽  
The Other ◽  
Tax Reduction ◽  
Capital Intensive ◽  
Tax Cuts

This chapter analyzes how the interlocking problems of taxation and the federal budget set the stage for the contentious politics of business in the 1980s. During the Reagan administration, ideological small-government conservatives clashed openly with the heads of manufacturing and other traditional capital-intensive business firms. In spite of their superficial common opposition to Keynesian demand stimulus and organized labor, these disparate groups of conservatives held sharply divergent priorities. Their struggle produced a tale of two tax cuts. One, supported by industrialists, aimed to revitalize manufacturing by providing incentives for investment and savings. The other, an antistatist quest to lower all taxes, garnered greater populist appeal. Although not mutually exclusive—both found a way into Reagan's tax reduction legislation in the summer of 1981—these competing visions marked an emerging schism within the ranks of conservatism.

Influences on Executive and Congressional Budgetary Priorities, 1955–1981

1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark S. Kamlet ◽  
David C. Mowery
Keyword(s):  
Business Cycle ◽  
Federal Budget ◽  
Equation System ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Economic Conditions ◽  
Reduced Form ◽  
Macroeconomic Factors ◽  
Institutional Influences ◽  
Political Variables ◽  
Budgetary Priorities

A reduced form equation system is used to analyze the influence of economic, political, and institutional influences on the budgetary priorities of the executive branch and Congress during fiscal 1955–81. Three related issues are considered: the extent to which political and macroeconomic factors affect priorities; the degree of interdependence among the components of the federal budget and between spending and revenues; and differences between the executive branch and Congress with respect to these issues. Both types of interdependence are present within both executive branch and congressional budgeting, although this interdependence is stronger within the executive branch. The influence of economic conditions on budgetary outcomes is strong but varies considerably across spending categories. There is no evidence of apolitical business cycle. Political variables exert a modest influence on the budgetary outcomes examined; differences between Democratic and Republican budgetary policies, as well as differences in the budgetary priorities of different presidential administrations, are small by comparison with the differences between executive and congressional policies.

How We Got Here, Why It Matters

2019 ◽  
pp. 33-52
Author(s):  
William G. Gale
Keyword(s):  
Great Recession ◽  
Defense Spending ◽  
The Great Recession ◽  
Fiscal Restraint ◽  
President Bush ◽  
A Share ◽  
Tax Cuts

As discussed in Chapter 2, from the nation’s founding until about 1980, debt as a share of the economy rose only during wars or recessions, and it fell rapidly after the war or recession ended due to lower defense spending or rapid revenue growth.Reagan’s tax cuts and defense spending changed that pattern, raising debt significantly during a time of peace and prosperity. Fiscal restraint by Presidents Bush and Clinton helped turn deficits into surpluses. But tax cuts and spending increases under the second President Bush, Obama, and Trump, along with the Great Recession of 2007 to 2009, boosted debt. The main lesson from the nation’s history is that the old solutions will not work this time around. The source of the country’s rising debt isn’t a war or recession but, instead, a built-in and growing imbalance between taxes and spending. The debt buildup cannot be stopped by cutting defense or boosting growth. Consequently, tough choices must be made about which programs to cut and which taxes to raise.

Military Spending and the US Defense Industry: Regional Patterns of Military Contracts and Subcontracts

1984 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
E J Malecki
Keyword(s):  
East Coast ◽  
Federal Budget ◽  
High Technology ◽  
Defense Industry ◽  
Defense Spending ◽  
The West ◽  
Regional Patterns ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Us ◽  
Core Areas

Military expenditure is the largest category of discretionary spending in the US federal budget. As such, its spatial patterns are also among the most concentrated. An analysis of recent defense spending data indicates that ten to fifteen states receive between them at least 70% of military contracts, and higher proportions of high-technology and research-related contracts. Examination of subcontracting data reveals that little wider dispersion of defense spending occurs to states outside the core areas in the West, on the East Coast, and in a few interior locations.

scholarly journals Russian military expenditure: What's behind the curtain?

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasily Zatsepin
Keyword(s):  
Federal Budget ◽  
Military Expenditure ◽  
Defense Spending ◽  
Budget Process ◽  
Industrial Complex ◽  
Military Industrial Complex ◽  
Russian Military ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Military

The article views the Russian defense budget as a representation of national strategic interests, priorities, and policies. Although Russia conforms to the United Nations' statistical standard for reporting military expenditure, several budget categories are hidden in other parts of the federal budget. Transparency in defense spending has been decreasing steadily. The budgeting process itself is cumbersome and opaque. Parliamentary control over the budget process and control over the execution of defense appropriations are limited. Importantly, frequent changes in the system of national accounting impede historical comparisons. The study finds that the low quality of defense management, dominated by members of the military-industrial complex, is a major problem locking Russian defense policy in an institutional trap.

scholarly journals Federal budget focused on tax cuts, not health

2006 ◽  
Vol 174 (12) ◽  
pp. 1700-1700
Author(s):  
W. Kondro
Keyword(s):  
Federal Budget ◽  
Tax Cuts

scholarly journals Transformation of the US Federal Budget Expenditures on National Defence for the 2017-2022 financial years

2021 ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
Svetlana Babich
Keyword(s):  
Budget Deficit ◽  
Federal Budget ◽  
Defense Spending ◽  
National Debt ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Military ◽  
Trump Administration ◽  
Military Budget

The article features a brief evaluation of the US military power based on the current level of expenses on defense.  A multifaceted analysis of the structure of the US military budget and its transformation during D. Trump’s and J. Biden’s administrations is presented, as well as its potential impact on the national debt and budget deficit of the US. The article argues that military spending remained a priority in federal budget expenses during Trump’s presidency and continues to remain one of the most crucial budget priorities for J. Biden’s administration.  The US reallocations of the military budget towards such expenses as “Research and Development” “Operation and Maintenance” which the Trump administration put into action allowed to continue the process of optimizing military forces to increase its combatant efficiency while limiting the burden of these expenses on US economy. The same practice is being conducted by J. Biden’s administration. The course of cutting taxes, while increasing defense spending during D. Trump lead to a 5-times increase of the budget deficit and a significant increase of the national debt, its 5 year payments will likely exceed the size of the US defense budget. The author concludes that Joe Biden’s administration is facing a challenging objective of supporting the economy's recovery after the Covid-19 pandemic and stabilizing the federal budget deficit, as well as national debt level.   

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document