The committee structure of both chambers of Congress is largely predicated on the need to produce an overall budget from the requests for money coming from the various administrative agencies and cabinet departments on the Executive Branch side of the federal government. Meaning, Congress and the business of Congress are so linked to the budget process as to be inseparable.
Essentially, if there is no budget there is no government, in any sane sense of the word.
By law, specifically the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, Congress is required to have a budget approved no later than April 15 before the start of the new fiscal year that begins on Oct. 1. The act, passed by a Congress fully controlled by the Democratic Party yet with strong bipartisan support, was designed to do three things. First, stop presidents from failing to spend all that had been appropriated by Congress. Second, bring some discipline into the process of constructing the federal budget. Third, take back from the Executive Branch actual control over spending. (Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon had followed the practice of presidents before them by spending or not spending as they chose rather than as Congress had authorized and appropriated.)
"We hire a president to make the tough decisions others won't make."
With those words former President Bill Clinton praised President Obama's decision to send in the team that killed Osama bin Laden. Clinton went on to say that others (meaning Mitt Romney, of course), would not have risked making that decision.
Are we to conclude that President Obama is not afraid of making tough decisions when issues are critical? (Killing bin Laden was not critical -- the guy had become irrelevant because the al-Qaida network long since had moved on without him. What would have been critical would have been taking bin Laden captive, but then Obama would have had to decide what to do with him, and that's when things would have gotten really critical.)
If President Obama is the "make tough decisions" guy Clinton claims he is, where has he been in the matter of the federal budget? The raid on bin Laden carried political risks, but only for Obama, whereas dealing with budget issues carries real risks for the entire nation.
More importantly, is taking a stand in defense of the law too hard for him?
The United States Senate has been in direct and willful violation of the 1974 budget act since President Obama entered the White House in January 2009. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid knows what the law requires but has dismissed it on the grounds that the 2011 agreement to extend the federal debt limit took care of the budget issue. This is patent nonsense. What about the two years prior to the 2011 agreement on the federal debt ceiling? What's the excuse for those two years? When did the 1974 act cease to be the law? Does the act contain language that grants the majority leader the power to have it mean what he wants it to mean?
Budgets act as constraints and impose limits that compel the making of choices within those limits. Is taking a stand for constraint and acknowledging limits too hard for President Obama? Apparently the law means nothing. All spending is now ad hoc and, consequently, out of control.
Go after bin Laden? Nothing to it. Respect the budget law and the discipline it imposes? Too risky, much too risky.