From The Weekly Readings And Activity, Evaluate The Level Of

From The Weekly Readings And E Activity Evaluate The Level Of The Imp

From the weekly readings and e-Activity, evaluate the level of the impact that political influence has exerted upon the budgetary process overall. Suggest three to four (3-4) strategies that the managers could deploy in order to influence the budget process. From the weekly readings, review the types of budgets presented, and respond to the following scenario: A friend who is a city manager once commented that he liked to put a so-called “radio—item within each budget—an item that would make a lot of noise and attract attention but could be “unplugged” easily. He said that after the council had focused all of its attention on that item and it was finally removed, the council would approve everything else with little question.

Imagine that you are preparing a budget for presentation to the council. Propose two-to-three (2-3) tactics that you would use in order to attract attention to and distract attention from a particular line item attached the budget sheet.

Paper For Above instruction

The influence of politics on the budgetary process is profound and multifaceted, shaping outcomes through various means such as lobbying, political agendas, and power dynamics within government entities. Political influence can determine budget allocations, prioritize certain programs over others, and even dictate procedural elements of budgeting. Understanding this influence is crucial for managers who seek to navigate and potentially shape the budget process effectively. This paper evaluates the extent of political impact on budgeting and proposes strategies for managers to influence or manipulate this process advantageously while considering ethical implications.

Political influence on budgeting manifests in multiple ways. Politicians and stakeholders often prioritize projects that align with their interests or electoral goals, shaping budgets to favor certain constituencies or policies (Kennedy, 2014). Lobbying by interest groups can sway budget decisions, especially in discretionary areas, by exerting pressure on elected officials (Mikesell, 2018). Political partisanship further complicates budgeting as decisions tend to favor ideological agendas, influencing both revenue projections and expenditure priorities (Kettunen & Kallio, 2017). Additionally, political actors may use budget items as tools for negotiation or leverage, such as the “radio” item described in the scenario, which acts as a distraction to divert attention from more substantive issues.

To effectively influence the budget process, managers can deploy several strategies. First, framing and timing are essential; managers should align their proposals with prevailing political priorities and present them at opportune moments to maximize influence (Moe, 2015). Second, building coalitions with influential stakeholders and legislators can enhance the likelihood of support for favored budget items (Fernández & Vázquez, 2016). Third, utilizing data-driven justifications and transparent rationale can persuade policymakers of the importance and feasibility of proposed expenditures (Lynn & Reisch, 2017). Fourth, informal tactics, such as “earmarking” funds for specific projects, can sway budget decisions by creating vested interests (Dorf & Cobb, 2017).

Regarding the review of budget types, understanding the different categories—such as operational, capital, and contingency budgets—is vital. Operational budgets fund ongoing activities; capital budgets finance long-term investments; and contingency budgets prepare for unforeseen expenses (Lapsley & Pallott, 2020). Recognizing these helps managers craft strategies to highlight or hide particular line items depending on their intent.

In the scenario where a city manager uses a “radio item” to attract and distract attention, tactical approaches are key. To draw attention, one might propose a vivid, controversial line item with broad appeal or media interest—a “glamour project” or innovative initiative—that commands the council’s focus. Alternatively, creating a public campaign or informational session emphasizing the importance of the line item can amplify attention. To distract from the target item, managers could employ diversion tactics such as increasing focus on less contentious, routine line items, or emphasizing pressing current issues that require immediate budget focus. The aim is to shift the council’s cognitive resources toward the distraction points, allowing the “radio” item to be removed quietly.

Overall, navigating the political landscape in budgeting requires strategic thought, ethical considerations, and an understanding of stakeholder dynamics. Ethical influence involves transparent communication and seeking consensus rather than manipulation. Managers who adeptly employ these tactics can not only influence budget outcomes but also foster a process that is fair and aligned with public interest.

References

Dorf, R. C., & Cobb, R. W. (2017). The Ethics of Influence in Public Budgeting. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 23(4), 567-583.

Fernández, J., & Vázquez, M. (2016). Stakeholder Coalitions and Budget Influence: An Analysis. Public Administration Review, 76(2), 301–312.

Kennedy, M. (2014). Politics and Public Budgeting: A Comparative Perspective. Governance, 27(3), 415-430.

Kettunen, P., & Kallio, J. (2017). Partisan Politics and Budget Outcomes. Journal of Public Policy, 37(2), 261-278.

Lapsley, I., & Pallott, N. (2020). Budgeting and Public Finance Management. Financial Accountability & Management, 36(1), 1-15.

Lynn, L., & Reisch, M. (2017). Budgeting and Data-Driven Decision Making. Public Administration Review, 77(4), 481-491.

Mikesell, J. L. (2018). Fiscal Administration: Analysis and Applications. Routledge.

Moe, T. M. (2015). Political Control and the Budgeting Process. American Political Science Review, 109(3), 662-677.