Fiscal responsibility remains one of the most important terms when it comes to the field of public administration (Cangiano, Curristine, & Lazare, 2013, p.205). Speaking about the present situation with regard to the distribution of fiscal responsibility in such country as the United States, it is necessary to say that its capital city has a wide range of opportunities when it comes to important issues related to this sphere.
Apart from a greater degree of responsibility, leaders and representatives of different government bodies in Washington are supposed to have more decision-making power when there are urgent questions that need to be addressed as soon as possible. At the same time, it is necessary to think about the intention to place more decision-making power in state capitals and possible consequences connected with implementation of this measure with regard to state budget.
To begin with, it is common knowledge that fiscal responsibility can be regarded as an important concept because it is strongly interconnected with the range of questions concerning debt and the use of practices related to making proper buying decisions and spending money with regard to the needs of the population. Although there can be certain divergence when it comes to definitions of the discussed notion, in general, it refers to debt management and making decisions related to budget spending (Buchanan & Wagner, 2013).
If we speak about the possible effects of decreasing fiscal responsibility of Washington and giving more power to leaders in state capitals, it is necessary to take into consideration that they may be both positive and negative (Berman, 2015). As for the former, there is no doubt that people related to the development of the particular states have a deeper understanding of the problems peculiar to certain location (Sacchi & Salotti, 2014). Therefore, it can be supposed that a greater decision-making power related to state budget will help those in different states to focus more on development and implementation of the measures allowing to balance the situation (Frederickson & Rohr, 2015, p. 194).
If the power is used by them in order to improve the quality of life of citizens and mitigate the consequences of financial instability, it will have a positive influence on state budget in general. Besides, representatives of states will be provided with an opportunity to take the initiative in planning out the budget of their states. Another reason why it can have a positive effect on budget of states and country that can be singled out in this connection is related to stricter control. Although having more decision-making power involves certain independence when it comes to affirmation and implementation of newer initiatives related to the budget of state, there is another important question related to responsibility. In this case, it will be necessary to make more decisions related to accounting and the data related to budget reported by representatives of states (Kyriacou, Muinelo-Gallo, & Roca-Sagalés, 2015).
It will be necessary in order to establish a stricter control over the measures taken by leaders in states related to financial resources. In other circumstances, possible mistakes of leaders in states will result in serious problems related to the state budget. Furthermore, giving more decision-making power should involve thorough preparation as it usually means greater risks for the entire country.
In the end, budgetary effects of shifting some measure of fiscal responsibility away from Washington and providing state capitals with more decision-making power also depend upon additional measures implemented in Washington to take charge of the situation in particular states and set a limit to possible cases of malconduct.
Berman, D. (2015). Local government and the states: Autonomy, politics and policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
Buchanan, J. M., & Wagner, R. E. (2013). Fiscal responsibility in constitutional democracy. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media.
Cangiano, M. M., Curristine, M. T. R., & Lazare, M. M. (2013). Public financial management and its emerging architecture. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
Frederickson, H. G., & Rohr, J. A. (2015). Ethics and public administration. New York, NY: Routledge.
Kyriacou, A. P., Muinelo-Gallo, L., & Roca-Sagalés, O. (2015). Fiscal decentralization and regional disparities: The importance of good governance. Papers in Regional Science, 94(1), 89-107.
Sacchi, A., & Salotti, S. (2014). How regional inequality affects fiscal decentralisation: Accounting for the autonomy of subcentral governments. Environment and Planning: Government and Policy, 32(1), 144-162.