Steven Wallace: Zero-based budgeting makes sense for government

I would like to bring some clarity to the recently-mentioned term “zero-based budgeting.” It does not mean automatic elimination of all programs, or any program. The entire government is not zeroed out.

It simply means that each government agency must justify each budget line at least one time.

Many books have been written over the last 40 years about obsolete and redundant programs that never die. Why can’t we stop some of these programs? If there are two or more agencies that have the same goal and serve the same people, why not consolidate them?

The answer is because our government uses “baseline budgeting.” Every agency starts with last year’s budget and automatically increases it by some factor. Nothing ever gets cut.

Every business goes through zero-based budgeting every year. In this way, things that used to be important but no longer serve a purpose can be eliminated, so that things that are more critical to today’s needs can get funded with no net increase in spending. (Hello, highways calling.) Or perhaps (gasp) a budget reduction?

Why can’t we do this with government? Just once each generation?

This story was originally published November 16, 2015 at 1:59 PM with the headline "Steven Wallace: Zero-based budgeting makes sense for government."