State budgets change during the year, but why they change and how the changes affect present and future budgetary policy remains largely unexplored. This article examines these two questions by studying the process through which the budget changes after appropriations have been approved, a process referred to as rebudgeting, in the state of Missouri. Findings indicate that rebudgeting in Missouri arises largely because of managerial needs and environmental pressures. If the content of annual budget was not allowed to adjust to these forces, the effectiveness of budgeting in general would likely decline. The findings also suggest that deviations from the appropriated budget may affect how the legislature and the executive define the budget base, and it reflects the predominant budgetary role the governor plays during the fiscal year. Finally, the data indicate that changes are facilitated not only by budgetary surpluses, as has previously been argued, but also by fiscal stress.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anton, T. J.
(1967). Roles and symbols in state expenditure. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 11 (1), 27-43
2.
Axelrod, D.
(1988). Budgeting for modern government (pp. 95-97, 170-178). New York: St. Martin's Press.
3.
Banks, J. S.
(1989). Agency budgets, cost information, and auditing. American Journal of Political Science, 33 (3), 670-699.
4.
Caiden, N.
, & Wildavsky, A. (1974). Planning and budgeting in poor countries. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
5.
Caiden, N.
(1978). Patterns of budgeting. Public Administration Review, 38 (6), 539-544.
6.
Caiden, N.
(1980). Budgeting in poor countries: Ten common assumptions reexamined. Public Administration Review, 40 (1), 40-46.
7.
Caiden, N.
(1981). Public budgeting amidst uncertainty and instability. Public Budgeting & Finance, 1 (1), 6-19.
8.
Caiden, N.
(1988). Shaping things to come: Super-budgeters as heroes (and heroines) in the late twentieth century. In I. S. Rubin (Ed.), New directions in budget theory (pp. 43-58). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
9.
Christensen, J. G.
(1982). Growth by exception: On the vain attempt to impose resource scarcity on the Danish public sector. Journal of Public Policy, 2 (2), 117-144.
10.
Executive Budget: Fiscal Year 1992. State of Missouri.
11.
Fisher, L.
(1975). Presidential spending power. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12.
Fisher, L.
(1984). The budget act of 1974: A further loss of spending control. In W. T. Wander, F. T. Hebert, & G. W. Copeland (Eds.), Congressional budgeting: Politics, process, and power (pp. 170-189). Baltimore: the Johns Hopkins Press.
13.
Forrester, J. P.
, & Mullins, D. R. (1992). Rebudgeting: The serial nature of municipal budgetary processes. Public Administration Review, 52 (5), 467-473.
14.
Hale, G.
(1977). State budget execution: The legislature's role. National Civic Review, 66 (6), 284-260.
15.
Hale, G. E.
, & Douglas, S. R. (1977). The politics of budget execution: Financial manipulation in state and local government. Administration & Society, 9 (3), 367-378.
16.
Hoskins, R. B. (1983). Within-year appropriations changes in Georgia state government: The implications for budget theory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
17.
Kane, T. J., Jr.
(1982). A national survey: Municipal budget directors view budgetary control. Public Budgeting & Finance, 2 (2), 44-50.
18.
Lauth, T. P.
(1988). Mid-year appropriations in Georgia: Allocating the "surplus."International Journal of Public Administration, 11 (5), 531-550.
19.
Lee, R. D., Jr.
, & Johnson, R. W. (1983). Public budgeting systems (3rd ed.). Baltimore: University Park Press.
20.
Lee, R. D., Jr.
(1981). Centralization/decentralization in state government budgeting. Public Budgeting & Finance, 1 (4), 76-79.
21.
Massey, J.
, & Straussman, J. D. (1981). Budget control is alive and well: Case study of a county government. Public Budgeting & Finance, 1 (4), 3-11.
22.
Ott, D. J.
, & Ott, A. F. (1977). Federal budget policy (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
23.
Pitsvada, B. T.
(1983). Flexibility in federal budget execution. Public Budgeting & Finance, 3 (2), 83-101.
24.
Rein, M.
, & Rabinovitz, F. (1978). Implementation: A theoretical perspective. In W. D. Burnham & M. W. Weinberg (Eds.), American politics and public policy (pp. 307-335). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
25.
Rubin, I. S.
(1990). The politics of public budgeting: Getting and spending, borrowing and balancing. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers, Chapter 6.
26.
Rubin, I. S.
(1985). Shrinking the federal government: The effects of cutbacks on five federal agencies. New York: Longman.
27.
Schick, A.
(1964). Control patterns in state budget execution. Public Administration Review, 24 (2), 97-106.
28.
Smithies, A.
(1975). Budgeting and the decision-making process. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Public Budgeting and Finance (pp. 253-261). Itasca, IL: Peacock.
29.
Straussman, J. D.
(1986). Courts and public purse strings: Have portraits of budgeting missed something?Public Administration Review, 46 (4), 345-351.
30.
Straussman, J. D.
(1988). Rights-based budgeting. In I. S. Rubin (Ed.), New directions in budget theory (pp. 100-123). Albany: SUNY Press.
31.
Tiebout, C. M.
(1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64 (5), 416-424.
32.
Thompson, F.
, & Zumeta, W. (1981). Control and controls: A reexamination of control patterns in budget execution. Policy Sciences, 13 (1), 25-50.
33.
Wanat, J.
(1975). Bureaucratic politics in the budget formulation arena. Administration & Society, 7 (2), 191-212.
34.
Wallace, R. A.
(1959). Congressional control of the budget. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 3 (2), 151-167.
35.
Wildavsky, A.
(1988). The new politics of the budgetary process. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.
36.
Yarwood, D.
(1981). Oversight of presidential funds by the appropriations committees: Learning from the Watergate crisis. Administration & Society, 13 (3), 299-346.
