Conservative pundit Sam Clovis on Monday called for state lawmakers to put together a biennial budget when they return to the statehouse next month.
Clovis writes in the Iowa Republican:
To give agency heads the opportunity to find savings that preserve services, the longer they can see into the future, the better. The biennial budget is a step in the right direction.
Republican Gov.-elect Terry Branstad repeatedly said during the campaign that he would develop a five-year budget plan so the legislature and state agencies could plan ahead. He also said he would veto any budget that doesn’t span two years.
However, research on various state budgeting practices shows there are no clear benefits to designing a two-year budget over a one-year budget.
Proponents of long-term budgets say the legislature will save time if they only need to debate a budget once every other year. However, a biennial budget would require officials to predict state revenues and expenditures as far as 30 months in the future, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. If the economy turns sour again, for instance, the state would find itself with fewer tax dollars than anticipated, making a biennial budget obsolete.
The consensus is that forecasting is more accurate in states with annual budgets. Accuracy in forecasting, in turn, reduces the need for special sessions of the legislature, supplemental appropriations, and reserves.
And the U.S. Congressional Budget Office reports:
Most states are subject to effective limits on spending and borrowing, and complying with these limits has become more difficult with the growing uncertainty of revenue streams. This problem is one reason why the states have moved away from biennial budgeting–44 states used biennial budgeting in 1940, but only 19 do now.