We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The fiscal system of the United States exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic. The United States makes decisions about how to allocate resources using a fiscal system that assumes a baseline of private ownership from which Congress may depart by generating “revenue” and appropriating funds to the executive branch to spend for a specific purpose. This chapter describes three aspects of this allocative framework that contributed to the country’s tragic failure to meet the coronavirus challenge. First, scorekeeping, the process for predicting what legislation will “cost” and what it will “save” to meet the political desire to minimize the need to borrow. A decade before the coronavirus pandemic the Affordable Care Act created a significant “Prevention and Public Health Fund,” but as Professor Westmoreland first documented, Congressional scorekeeping rules that treat preventive investment as worthless encouraged Congress to “raid” the fund to spend on purposes other than public health, which it did. Second, Congress’ reliance on short-term appropriations to retain influence over the executive branch. Although essential to the separation of powers, the parasitic power of the purse and its insistence on short-term spending packages repeatedly stymied and hobbled federal relief with short-, medium-, and long-term impacts on the nation’s health and economic wellbeing. Third, the executive’s asymmetric discretion over spending. The president’s discretion to refuse to spend made it possible for President Trump to frustrate the efforts of Congress to continue the country’s support for the World Health Organization by declining to allocate appropriated funds for the organization in the midst of the pandemic.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.