Summary: GAO supports the provisions of S. 1824 that deal with multiyear authorizations and biennial budget resolutions. GAO believes that multiyear fiscal policy agreements and multiyear authorizations make a great deal of sense, but they do not require changing the appropriations decision cycle for annual to biennial. Although biennial appropriations could save time for federal agencies, they also could shift control and oversight over federal programs away from Congress. Moreover, although budgeting always involves forecasting, the longer the period of the forecast, the greater the uncertainty. Increased difficulty in forecasting is one of the main reasons that states have switched from biennial to annual cycles. Dramatic changes in program design or agency structure, such as those that Congress is considering in many areas, will make budget forecasting even more difficult. Moving from an annual to a biennial appropriations cycle at the same time may be unwise, given the potential for program changes that could require major budgeting changes in the second year of a biennium. If this were to happen, biennial budgeting would exist only in theory. In GAO's view, biennial appropriations would hardly be a cure-all for the nation's budget problems. Congress will have to ask itself how it wants to exercise its constitutional authority over appropriations and in what forum it will conduct its oversight responsibilities.
