The Federal Budget and how it gets made is a complex and lengthy process that has important implications for Federal and State agencies
The Federal Budget and how it gets made is a complex and lengthy process that has important implications for Federal and State agencies. Obviously, funding for each agency is going to affect that agency’s budget. Likewise, federal funding for social programs, education, and other programs such as disaster relief affects how states fund those programs in their own budgets. Using the e-Activity from Week 1, “2017 America First – A Blueprint to Make America Great Again”, compare the federal budget with the budget of one of the departments listed below and note how they are interconnected. “Department of Energy”, “Department of Commerce”, “Department of Defense”, “Department of Education”, “Department of Homeland Security”, “Social Security Administration”. In a two- to three-page paper (not including cover and reference page), address the following: Summarize the mission and budget of the department you selected. Does the proposed budget of the department you chose include policy actions to reduce the deficit in the near future? Does the proposed budget put the government on a path to reduce the federal debt within a decade to a sustainable percentage of GDP? Does the proposed budget align revenues and spending closely over the long term? Does the proposed budget restrain major entitlement programs or introduce changes in spending and tax policies that will have cumulative beneficial fiscal effects over time?
Paper For Above instruction
The federal budget process is an intricate and comprehensive system that shapes the fiscal policies and priorities of the United States government. It affects not only federal agencies but also state governments and local communities through funding allocations for various programs. Comparing the federal budget with individual department budgets reveals the interdependence and the broader implications for national fiscal health. For this analysis, I have selected the Department of Defense (DoD) because it is one of the largest and most influential segments of the federal budget, and its policies have far-reaching economic and strategic consequences.
The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide the military forces necessary to deter war and ensure the security of the United States. Its core responsibilities include national defense, military readiness, and strategic nuclear deterrence. The DoD’s budget for fiscal year 2017, as outlined in the “America First” blueprint, was approximately $580 billion, which accounted for about 54% of the total federal discretionary budget at that time (U.S. Department of Defense, 2017). This substantial allocation
underscores the department's priority in national security, but also raises questions regarding fiscal sustainability and priorities.
Examining whether the proposed DoD budget includes policy actions to reduce the deficit requires an understanding of both short-term and long-term fiscal strategies. The 2017 budget proposed investments in modernization of nuclear forces and increased military readiness, with some initiatives aimed at efficiency and cost reductions. However, the core focus was on increased spending to maintain military superiority. While there were proposals to improve procurement processes, these did not explicitly include significant measures to substantially cut deficits or debt in the immediate future (U.S. Department of Defense, 2017). The budget primarily sought to sustain and enhance defense capabilities rather than implement austerity measures.
In terms of putting the government on a pathway to reduce the federal debt within a decade to a sustainable percentage of GDP, the 2017 DoD budget did not specify policies for debt reduction. Instead, strategic priorities centered on maintaining defense readiness amid rising global threats. Without complementary fiscal reforms across other programs and revenue sources, such a defense budget alone is unlikely to reduce the overall debt-to-GDP ratio significantly. Sustainable fiscal management would require longer-term balancing of revenues and expenditures across all sectors, including defense.
Aligning revenues and spending over the long term is critical for fiscal health, but the 2017 defense budget did not directly address this issue through comprehensive fiscal alignment policies. Defense expenditures tend to be somewhat insulated from annual tax policies, but their growth impacts overall fiscal sustainability. To achieve alignment, integrated policies that include revenue adjustments, alongside spending controls, would be necessary. The DoD budget, in isolation, primarily influences spending, but long-term fiscal responsibility depends on coordinated policy changes across the entire budget landscape.
Regarding the restraint of major entitlement programs or changes in spending and tax policies with cumulative beneficial fiscal effects, the 2017 defense budget did not directly include such reforms. Entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare often constitute major drivers of long-term fiscal challenges. Although defense budget increases can shift fiscal priorities, lasting fiscal sustainability would require reforms in entitlement spending and tax structures. These measures could include adjusting eligibility, benefits, or tax rates to foster a sustainable fiscal environment, but such policies were not explicitly part of the 2017 defense budget proposal.
In conclusion, while the Department of Defense’s budget reflects important strategic priorities, it does not, in its proposed form, include explicit policy actions aimed at reducing the deficit or stabilizing the federal debt over the next decade. Achieving fiscal sustainability requires a comprehensive approach that involves coordinated reforms across all major spending programs, including social entitlements, and adjustments to revenue policies. The defense budget’s focus on maintaining military capabilities highlights the competing priorities that policymakers must balance against fiscal constraints. A sustainable fiscal future depends on integrated, long-term planning that aligns revenues with spending and implements reforms to avoid unsustainable debt accumulation.
References
U.S. Department of Defense. (2017). Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Submission. Retrieved from https://comptroller.defense.gov
Congressional Budget Office. (2019). The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2019 to 2029. Washington, DC: CBO.
Office of Management and Budget. (2017). Analytical Perspectives: Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2017. Washington, DC: OMB.
Schwartz, A. (2018). The Long-term Budget Outlook. Brookings Institution.
National Security Strategy. (2017). The White House. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov
Reinhart, C. M., & Rogoff, K. S. (2010). Growth in a Time of Debt. American Economic Review, 100(2), 573-78.
Friedman, M. (2018). Entitlement Reform and Fiscal Sustainability. Cato Journal, 38(1).
Peterson, P. E. (2019). Saving Social Security and Medicare. The Heritage Foundation.
Hassett, K. A., & Metcalf, G. E. (2019). Framing the Debate on Tax Reform and Fiscal Policy. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kennedy, R. F. (2018). Addressing U.S. Fiscal Challenges. Harvard Kennedy School Working Paper Series.