This study examines public budgeting researchers' views on the proposed balanced budget constitutional amendment. Focusing on the amendment's viability and adoptability, the study shows that the experts do not consider the balanced budget amendment a viable reform idea. The study further reveals that the experts' views on the balanced budget amendment are significantly correlated to their personal characteristics. Implications concerning the results of this study are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boskin, M. J.
, Niskanen, W. A., Penner, R. G., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1984-85). Budget policy and processes: Where do we go from here?Contemporary Policy Issues, III (Fall), 53-78.
2.
Break, G.
(1980). Financing government in a federal system. Washington, DC: Brookings.
3.
Caiden, N.
(1983). Guidelines to federal budget reform. Public Budgeting & Finance, 3 (Winter), 4-22.
4.
Cohen, R. C.
(1944). Budget balancers' yellow-brick road. National Journal (March 5), 548.
5.
Cohen, R. C.
, & Tisinger, R. (1993). Yep, talk's still cheap. National Journal (December 11), 2950-2952.
6.
Dolbeare, K.
, & Dolbeare, P. (1976). American ideologies (3rd Ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
7.
Gallup, G., Jr.
(1990). The Gallup poll: Public opinion 1989. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources, Inc.
8.
Grizzle, G. A.
, & Yu, P. J. (1990). What is taught as `public financial management.'Public Administration Quarterly, 14 (Summer), 173-189.
9.
Hendrick, R.
(1992). Budget reform in the 1980s: The compatibility of design and practice. Public Budgeting & Financial Management, 4 (3), 611-644.
10.
Liou, K. T.
(1992). Major contributors to public budgeting and financial management: An analysis of selected public administration literature. Unpublished manuscript, Florida Atlantic University (Spring).
11.
Lynch, T. D.
(Ed.). (1991). Federal budget & financial management reform. Westport, CT: Quorum books.
12.
Lynch, T. D.
, & Guess, G. M. (1986). Critical perspectives on the federal budget deficit debate. International Journal of Public Administration, 8 (2), 171-184.
13.
Lynch, T. D.
, & Liou, K. T. (1993). Perceptions on federal budget reforms: Public budgeting researchers' view. Public Budgeting & Finance, 13, 2 (Summer, 56-65.
14.
Nice, D. C.
(1986). State support for constitutional balanced budget requirements. Journal of Politics, 48 (February), 134-142.
15.
Pilegge, J. C.
(1989). From accounting to ZBB: Trends in budgetary research. Public Budgeting & Financial Management, 1, (2), 239-248.
16.
Premchand, A.
(1981a). Government budget reforms: An overview. Public Budgeting & Finance, 1 (Summer), 74-85.
17.
Premchand, A.
(1981b). Government budget reforms: Agenda for the 1980s. Public Budgeting & Finance, 1 (Autumn), 16-24.
18.
Rivlin, A. M.
(1984). The political economy of budget deficits: Reform of the budget process. AEA Papers and Proceedings, 74 (May), 133-137.
19.
Sargent, L.
(1981). Contemporary political ideologies (5th Ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
20.
Shannon, J.
, & Wallin, B. (1979). Restraining the federal budget: Alternative policies and strategies. Intergovernmental Perspective, 5, 8-14.
Thurber, J. A.
, & Durst, S. L. (1991). Delay, deadlock, and deficits: Evaluating proposals for congressional budget reform. In T. D. Lynch (Ed.), Federal budget & financial management reform (pp. 53-88). Westport, CT: Quorum books.
23.
U.S. General Accounting Office
. (1993). Balanced budget requirements: State experiences and implications for the federal government. Briefing Report to the Chairman, Committee on the Budget, House of Representatives. GAO/AFMD-93-58BR. (March). Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
