Abstract
Legislative Budget Offices are a core element in the movement towards enhancing transparency and accountability in the fiscal process. Yet they are fragile institutions that must continually defend their position in the budget process through analytical rigour and nonpartisanship. When they do come under attack, the consequences for the fiscal process are singularly dire. That is why, in an era of “alternative facts” and “post-truth” nostrums, the viability of the American Congressional Budget Office (CBO) requires revisitation. This paper considers the text of remarks from a hostile American political figure against the CBO (Gingrich, 2017), to reexamine an emergent question in budgetary philosophy: is a Legislative Budget Office compatible with the nostrums of an “alternative facts” and post-Truth era?
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
