replies

 Review your peer’s choice for the least transparent budget format. Do you agree with their reasoning? Offer your perspective on why a different format might be less transparent, or expand on their points with additional insights or examples.

Discussion reply 1

The line-item budget is the least clear of the three main government budget types, line-item, performance, and program, for taxpayers to understand. Although it is the oldest and most commonly used format in government, it mainly focuses on how money is spent instead of what results are achieved (Chen, Weikart, & Williams, 2014). Because of this focus on costs, it is hard for the public to see how well their tax dollars are being used.

Lack of Transparency A line-item budget lists every cost by category, such as salaries, travel, equipment, and supplies. While this helps officials track and control spending, it does not explain what programs or services the money supports. For example, taxpayers might see how much was spent on office supplies, but they cannot easily tell how that spending helps improve public safety, health, or education. This gap between spending and outcomes makes it difficult to measure the real value of government activities (Chen et al., 2014).

Alternative Budget Formats Other types of budgets make things clearer. A performance budget connects spending directly to measurable results, such as the cost to repair a mile of road or the number of permits issued. A program budget goes further by showing how money supports larger policy goals, like education, public safety, or the environment. These formats help taxpayers better understand what their money is achieving (Chen et al., 2014).

Administrative Use vs. Public Understanding According to Chen et al. (2014), line-item budgets work well for keeping spending under control and ensuring rules are followed. However, they do not show how policies perform or what impact they have. As a result, even though this format is simple for administrators to use, it prevents taxpayers from clearly seeing how government spending benefits them or whether public funds are being used wisely.

Discussion reply 2

Taxpayers are the primary source of funding for a variety of public services, including education, transportation and public safety (i.e. police and fire services).  Due to this forced burden, the community is entitled to know where and how their money is being spent.  Searchable and accessible public services’ budgets and financial plans provide a certain level of transparency to witness the expenditures of the various governmental agencies (Chen, et al., 2014).    This transparency then provides an opportunity to build trust and buy-in from its citizenry.  However, some budget formats are more transparent than others.

Line-item budgeting is the oldest and simplest budgeting format.  There is a list of financial source inputs and categorized expenditures or outputs of that money.  Due to its simplicity and easily observable purchases, this intuitively appears to be the most transparent. This can be true within certain contexts, however, within the public services this is the least transparent budgeting format (Understanding Types of Budgets: A comprehensive Overview, 2020).  Line-item budgeting focuses on objects or things of expenditures.  Public agencies provide community services, and defining “services” can be very challenging to specifically quantify.  This budgeting format works well at identifying the cost of resources to facilitate service delivery (i.e. vehicle, equipment, etc.), but are the services that are being funded actually produce its designed outcomes?

Line-item budgeting transparency design flaws are contrary to program and performance budgeting, which specifically focuses on anticipated outcomes.  Program and performance budgeting attempts to identify costs and expected defined outcomes.  This structure provides additional information to the taxpayers in order to gather a greater understanding of what services should be expected from their investment.