“The president proposes, the Congress disposes” is the way the Founders set up our government. Here’s how it’s supposed to work: legislation is proposed (by the president or a member of Congress) through an “authorization” bill that “can establish, continue, or modify an agency, program, or activity” including the estimated cost. However, a separate “appropriations” legislation must then be passed to fund that project/activity (i.e., the amount that actually will be spent).
The U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 reads: “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” According to Cornell’s Legal Information Institute (LII), “This was intended as a restriction upon the disbursing authority of the Executive department” (emphasis mine).
But that hasn’t stopped the U.S. national debt from growing exponentially. The U.S. In 1971, the debt was $398 billion; 1981 was the last year our debt was below the $1 trillion mark. Under Barack Obama, the debt jumped from just under $12 trillion to almost $20 trillion, even more than the almost $6 trillion increase under George W. Bush. Under Trump, there was another $6.5 trillion increase in national debt (fueled partly by the recession but especially by the COVID debacle). When Joe Biden took office the debt was almost $27 trillion, and today it stands at $34 trillion — a $7 trillion increase in just three years. (READ MORE: Five More Stupid Things the Left Demands You Believe)
Practically speaking, Congress has removed that restriction. LII continues, “Congress…approved the frequent practice of making ‘lump sum’ appropriations … to be allotted and expended as directed by designated government agencies” (emphasis mine). That sounds reasonable since we don’t want politicians — who are often ignorant of what’s needed — dictating how monies are spent.’
An example: In the early 90s Georgia began participating in the lottery and proceeds were supposed to support public education. Once at an elementary school for a presentation, I noticed that every classroom was filled with computers, even the first grade, and commented in the teacher’s lounge on their good fortune getting all that money from the state government. (READ MORE: Congress Can Redeem Itself by Calling for Help)
Every teacher froze and looked at me, and I was curtly informed that politicians in Atlanta had decided that “all that money” could only be spent on computers, despite the educators’ repeated requests to spend it on more pressing needs (books, teacher’s aides, classroom equipment and supplies, etc.). Allowing federal agency personnel familiar with their needs to decide how money is spent sounds rational.
But, when the government is involved, what sounds good in theory doesn’t always translate to practical, effective outcomes. Clyde Crews, Jr., described what he called the “Unconstitutionality Index,” the purpose of which was “to highlight … the extent to which the unelected personnel of federal agencies … do the bulk of lawmaking in America” (emphasis mine).
In 2020, for example, Congress passed 178 laws; during that same year, federal agencies issued 3,353 rules and regulations — which can impact the daily lives of American citizens every bit as much as Congressional legislation, even though citizens have no representation in the federal bureaucracy.
Crews came up with his index by dividing the number of federal agency rules by the number of laws passed by Congress. In 2020, that index was 19 (3,353/178), which means unelected bureaucrats created 19 times more “laws” than Congress.
Under Biden, in 2021 federal agencies imposed 4,429 rules and regulations, while Congress passed just 143 bills, for an index of 31. In 2022 there were 3,168 federal rules and 247 bills, so bureaucrats created “only” 13 times as many rules as laws passed by Congress.
In a 2023 update (which slightly altered the 2020 index), Crews notes “Administrative agencies, not Congress, do most U.S. lawmaking, despite Article I of the Constitution stipulating otherwise. Congress is to blame here, as it routinely … delegates substantial lawmaking power to agencies.”
Yes, but didn’t we just say that un-informed politicians shouldn’t micro-manage “experts”? The trouble is that federal agencies are not populated by experts but by bureaucrats, whose primary motivation is (a) acquiring a bigger budget next year by (b) spending all the money allocated for this year, so Congress will provide as much or more for next year. No incentive to save, only to somehow spend it all to justify getting more. Try running your household like that.
Crews is exactly right: Congress is to blame. They neglect their Constitutional duties, simply using last year’s budget as the starting point for ever-growing budgets. As Ronald Reagan said, “A government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Even now, with a $34 trillion national debt, instead of rejecting budget requests that are simply pork, political favors, and pay-back for political donors, they continue to spend “like drunken sailors,” putting the U.S. on the verge of a Soviet-style economic collapse.
The difference is that sailors once sobered up, must suffer the consequences of their irresponsible spending. Congress does not. It just passes that suffering on to us, the taxpayers.
