Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Discretionary spending

Discretionary spending constitutes the segment of a —typically governmental—subject to annual legislative approval through appropriations, distinguishing it from mandatory outlays automatically required by preexisting statutes such as programs. In the United States federal context, it encompasses defense-related expenditures alongside nondefense categories like , transportation, , and scientific research, enabling policymakers to adapt allocations to evolving priorities without altering underlying laws. Totaling approximately $1.7 trillion in 2023, discretionary outlays represented about 27 percent of overall federal spending, with nondefense components comprising over half of that amount despite often dominating public discourse on the category. This share has markedly declined from roughly 60 percent in the early , reflecting the expansion of mandatory programs driven by demographic shifts and legislative expansions in entitlements, which now account for the majority of the and constrain fiscal flexibility. Nondefense discretionary , in particular, supports a broad array of domestic initiatives but faces recurrent pressures from mechanisms, caps, and competing demands, underscoring its role as a primary arena for inter-branch negotiations over . As a proportion of , discretionary spending hovered near historical lows at around 6.3 percent in 2024 projections, highlighting ongoing debates on balancing needs with investments in and amid rising mandatory obligations and interest costs.

Core Definitions and Distinctions

Personal Discretionary Spending

Personal discretionary spending encompasses expenditures on non-essential that individuals or households undertake voluntarily, after allocating funds to basic necessities required for survival and essential operations. These include items enhancing or , such as , hobbies, , and purchases, which can be deferred or eliminated without immediate threat to . In contrast, non-discretionary personal spending covers fixed or semi-fixed costs like or payments, staple groceries, utility bills, commuting transportation, and minimum healthcare needs, which form the foundational layer. Typical categories of personal discretionary spending feature variability across demographics and economic cycles. , encompassing fees for admissions, audio-visual equipment, and pets, averaged $3,635 annually per U.S. consumer unit in 2023. Apparel and services, including and beyond basic wardrobes, reached $2,041 in the same year. Other examples include alcoholic beverages ($637), [tobacco](/page/Tobacco) products (370), and reading materials ($117), alongside portions of food expenditures allocated to dining out or recreation travel. spending, at $1,656, often straddles discretionary and investment boundaries depending on whether it funds elective courses versus required schooling. Measurement of personal discretionary spending relies on surveys like the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Expenditure Survey, which tracks detailed outlays but does not aggregate a singular "discretionary" metric, requiring analysts to classify categories based on essentiality. In 2023, total average consumer unit expenditures hit $77,280, with discretionary-leaning categories summing to approximately $8,500 when excluding core essentials like housing ($25,436), transportation ($13,174), food ($9,985), and healthcare ($6,159). This suggests discretionary outlays represent roughly 10-20% of budgets for many households, though higher-income groups allocate more due to greater surplus after needs. Trends show resilience in recessions via cuts—discretionary services fell 30% during the 2020 COVID-19 downturn—but rebound with income growth, reflecting causal links to disposable income and consumer confidence rather than institutional mandates.

Public Discretionary Spending

Public discretionary spending refers to government expenditures authorized annually through legislative appropriations processes, distinguishing it from driven by statutory formulas such as entitlements. In the United States federal budget, this category encompasses funding for national defense and a range of domestic programs, requiring congressional approval each via 12 annual appropriations bills. Discretionary outlays are divided into defense and nondefense components, with defense typically accounting for approximately half. discretionary spending, totaling around $900 billion in 2024, covers military operations, personnel, , , and maintenance. Nondefense discretionary spending, exceeding $900 billion in the same year, funds areas including , , veterans' services, , , scientific , and . Historically, discretionary spending has declined as a share of total federal outlays due to the expansion of mandatory programs and interest payments. In 2024, discretionary spending constituted 27% of the $6.8 federal budget, down from about two-thirds in the 1960s. As a percentage of , it fell from 12.3% in 1962 to around 6.6% in recent years, reflecting slower growth relative to mandatory obligations. This annual appropriation mechanism allows flexibility to respond to changing priorities, such as threats or economic conditions, but subjects spending to political negotiations and potential under laws like the Budget Control Act of 2011. In 2023, discretionary outlays reached $1.7 trillion within a $6.2 trillion total budget, underscoring its role in controllable despite representing a shrinking portion of overall expenditures.

Historical Context

Origins and Early Concepts

The concept of discretionary spending originated in governmental budgeting practices, where expenditures required explicit legislative authorization rather than automatic execution under preexisting statutes. In early republican systems, such as the from , the constitutional mandate that "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law" ensured nearly all federal outlays were subject to annual congressional discretion, encompassing , , and administrative costs without fixed entitlements. This framework contrasted with monarchial or absolutist systems, where rulers often exercised unchecked fiscal authority, but aligned with parliamentary traditions in , where the Bill of Rights 1689 prohibited taxation or spending without parliamentary consent, laying groundwork for appropriated, non-permanent funding. As governments expanded social welfare roles in the , the distinction sharpened between such annually appropriated funds—termed discretionary—and mandatory outlays driven by eligibility formulas in entitlement laws. The U.S. of August 14, 1935, marked an early shift by establishing permanent payments untethered to yearly votes, comprising initial mandatory spending of $1 million in 1937. Pre-New Deal federal budgets, however, remained overwhelmingly discretionary; for instance, in 1930, non-entitlement outlays dominated at over 90% of total spending, reflecting reliance on appropriations for programs like . In , analogous early ideas appeared in 18th- and 19th-century thrift literature, prioritizing essential "needs" over elective "wants" to avoid debt. Benjamin Franklin's (1732–1758) advocated distinguishing necessities like and from luxuries, warning that "a small leak will sink a great ship" through unchecked optional expenditures. This principle echoed in Victorian-era household management texts, such as Isabella Beeton's Book of Household Management (1861), which categorized budgets into fixed essentials (rent, provisions) and variable indulgences (entertainment, finery), influencing modern discretionary framing amid rising consumer economies. By the early , U.S. movements formalized needs-versus-wants budgeting, as in the 1919 Household Budgets and the Cost of Living by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which tracked "current expenses" separable into unavoidable basics and adjustable leisure spending.

Development in Modern Budgeting

The concept of discretionary spending in modern government budgeting developed primarily in response to the expansion of entitlement programs during the mid-20th century, particularly in the United States, where expenditures not subject to annual appropriations grew significantly. Following , programs like Social Security expansions and the introduction of in 1965 increased automatic outlays governed by statutory formulas, contrasting with traditional appropriations for , , and other controllable items. This evolution marked a departure from earlier budgeting eras, where most federal spending required yearly congressional approval, allowing for greater fiscal flexibility but exposing budgets to political pressures. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 represented a pivotal formalization of this distinction, establishing a structured with budget resolutions, committees, and reconciliation mechanisms that separated discretionary appropriations—requiring annual funding bills—from driven by permanent laws. Prior to 1975, discretionary spending comprised over half of the U.S. federal , enabling lawmakers and the to reassess priorities each year. The Act aimed to enhance congressional control amid rising deficits, but as mandatory programs proliferated, discretionary's share diminished; for example, it accounted for approximately two-thirds of total spending in the but only 27% by 2024. Subsequent reforms, such as the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Gramm-Rudman-Hollings) and the Enforcement Act of 1990, further emphasized caps on discretionary outlays to curb overall deficits, introducing sequestration mechanisms when limits were breached. These measures reflected causal pressures from escalating mandatory commitments, which by the dominated budget growth, reducing discretionary spending's proportion from about 60% in the early to under 30% in recent decades. Internationally, similar distinctions emerged in parliamentary systems, though less rigidly, as welfare states expanded post-1945, with countries like the differentiating "controlled" (discretionary) from "uncontrolled" (mandatory) expenditures in public accounts. Empirical data underscores this trend: U.S. discretionary spending as a share of GDP declined from 12.3% in 1962 to lower levels by the , highlighting the structural shift toward entitlement-driven budgets.

Applications in Personal Finance

Categories and Measurement

In personal finance, discretionary spending refers to outlays on non-essential items and services that individuals elect after covering necessities such as housing, utilities, groceries, transportation, healthcare, and minimum debt obligations. These expenditures typically enhance lifestyle or provide enjoyment but can be deferred or eliminated without immediate threat to survival or core functionality. Common categories of discretionary spending include (such as streaming subscriptions, movie tickets, and recreational activities), dining out and away from home, apparel and accessories beyond basic needs, and vacations, hobbies (e.g., sporting goods or collectibles), and products, and personal care items like non-medical . Data from the U.S. ' Consumer Expenditure Survey illustrate these patterns; for instance, in 2023, average annual consumer unit spending on reached $3,031, away from home totaled $3,737, and apparel and services amounted to $1,945, representing portions often classified as discretionary after essentials like [housing](/page/Housing) (25,436) and transportation ($13,174). These figures vary by quintile, with higher earners allocating more to and due to greater residual post-essentials. Discretionary spending is measured by first calculating —typically after-tax earnings minus mandatory savings and essential fixed/variable costs—then tracking allocations to non-essential categories via budgeting tools, expense logs, or financial apps. A widely referenced is the 50/30/20 rule, which suggests limiting discretionary outlays to 30% of , with 50% for needs and 20% for savings or debt reduction; this framework, popularized in financial planning, helps quantify excess by reviewing bank statements or data over a 1-3 month period. Empirical measurement draws from surveys like the BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey, which captures detailed household diaries and interviews to estimate average discretionary shares; in 2023, such non-essential categories comprised roughly 20-25% of total expenditures for middle-income households, though this fluctuates with economic conditions like . To refine personal tracking, individuals rank discretionary items by priority (e.g., essential vs. impulse buys) and adjust based on historical data, ensuring alignment with long-term financial goals.

Behavioral and Economic Drivers

Behavioral drivers of personal discretionary spending often stem from cognitive biases and psychological tendencies that prioritize short-term gratification over long-term . For instance, leads individuals to categorize funds into distinct "buckets," such as treating windfalls like tax refunds as separate from regular income, thereby increasing the likelihood of allocating them to non-essential purchases rather than savings. exacerbates this by causing people to overvalue immediate rewards, such as dining out or , at the expense of future needs, as evidenced in research showing diminished in spending decisions. Social pressures, including the desire for status signaling through , further propel discretionary outlays, with empirical studies linking peer influences and cultural norms to elevated spending on and experiences. Low clarity has been shown to heighten discretionary spending tendencies, as individuals with unclear self-identity resort to avoidant strategies, using purchases for temporary emotional relief rather than addressing underlying insecurities. Emotional buying, often triggered by or —where rising income leads to proportionally higher non-essential expenditures—compounds these effects, with surveys indicating that such habits contribute to overspending in categories like apparel and leisure. During economic uncertainty or crises, can amplify discretionary restraint or erratic splurges, as seen in shifts toward essential goods amid , though baseline tendencies revert to bias-driven patterns in stable conditions. Economic drivers primarily revolve around and macroeconomic conditions that modulate households' capacity and willingness to engage in non-mandatory . Discretionary spending rises with increases in real , which directly expands the pool available for luxuries like and dining after covering necessities, for a significant portion of consumer expenditure variance in U.S. households. Higher-income households disproportionately drive discretionary , channeling more into services and that stimulate broader economic activity, as their spending elasticity amplifies during periods of . Consumer confidence serves as a key intermediary, with empirical analyses revealing that elevated and correlate with up to 20-30% higher outlays in discretionary categories like and apparel, independent of income levels. Conversely, financial or perceived economic instability prompts borrowing for discretionary items among optimistic low-resource consumers, while indices inversely predict reduced expenditures, as households prioritize amid . erodes purchasing power for non-essentials, curbing spending as stagnates, though periods of stability foster confidence-driven rebounds in these areas.

Government Budgeting Frameworks

United States Federal Budget

In the , discretionary spending comprises the portion of expenditures subject to annual appropriation by , distinguishing it from governed by statutory formulas such as Social Security and . This category funds a wide array of government operations, including national , , , and scientific , and requires enactment of specific appropriations legislation each to provide budget authority. The process originates with the submitting a comprehensive to by the first Monday in February, compiled by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) based on agency requests and priorities. reviews this through its budget committees, which set overall spending levels via a concurrent resolution, followed by the and Appropriations Committees drafting and passing up to 12 individual appropriations bills covering and non- programs. These bills must be reconciled and signed into law by the , with continuing resolutions often used to avoid shutdowns if deadlines are missed. Discretionary spending is bifurcated into and non- components, with encompassing Department of Defense activities, nuclear weapons programs, and certain international affairs, while non- includes funding for departments such as , Housing and Urban Development, and , as well as broader functions like and justice administration. In 2024, appropriated approximately $1.6 trillion in discretionary authority, split between $842 billion for and $758 billion for non- programs. Actual outlays for discretionary programs reached $1.8 trillion that year, with non- outlays exceeding due to timing differences in spending patterns. This represented about 27 percent of total federal outlays of $6.8 trillion, a share that has declined from historical highs as and net interest have grown faster relative to (GDP). As a percentage of GDP, discretionary outlays stood at roughly 6.3 percent in 2024, approaching post-World War II lows. The framework for discretionary spending has been shaped by mechanisms like the , which imposed caps to enforce fiscal restraint, though these have periodically been adjusted or suspended through bipartisan agreements. Appropriations levels are influenced by economic conditions, national needs, and political negotiations, with typically receiving priority in allocations but facing scrutiny over efficiency and overseas commitments. Non- discretionary funding supports domestic priorities but often competes with program expansions, contributing to debates on reallocating resources without increasing deficits. Projections from the indicate that under current law, the discretionary share will continue shrinking, potentially falling below 25 percent of the by the early absent changes.

Mandatory Versus Discretionary Spending

In the United States federal budget, spending is categorized into mandatory and discretionary components, with mandatory spending comprising the majority of outlays. Mandatory spending, also known as direct spending, includes federal benefit programs and payments authorized by permanent statutes rather than annual appropriations acts, such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, which together accounted for over half of the $4.1 trillion in mandatory outlays in fiscal year 2024. Other examples encompass income security programs like unemployment compensation, Supplemental Security Income, and nutrition assistance; federal civilian and military retirement benefits; and veterans' benefits. These expenditures occur automatically based on eligibility criteria defined in law, without requiring new congressional approval each year, though Congress can alter the underlying statutes to modify eligibility, benefits, or funding formulas. Discretionary spending, by contrast, requires explicit annual authorization through appropriations legislation passed by and signed by the , providing lawmakers with direct control over funding levels each . In 2024, discretionary outlays totaled $1.8 trillion, representing approximately 27% of total spending of $6.8 trillion, with nondefense programs comprising more than half of that amount. This category primarily funds national defense activities, which constitute about half of discretionary allocations, alongside nondefense areas such as , , housing assistance, scientific , , and international affairs. Unlike , discretionary funding is subject to negotiation and caps under laws like the Budget Control Act, though mechanisms have periodically enforced reductions when agreements fail. The distinction arises from constitutional and statutory frameworks: Article I of the U.S. Constitution grants the power of the purse, but mandatory programs embed spending authority in entitlement laws, insulating them from yearly budget battles and tying growth to factors like population aging and inflation adjustments. In fiscal year 2024, dominated at 60% of the budget (excluding net interest on the debt, which is often treated separately but shares mandatory characteristics), reflecting long-term commitments that have expanded since the through legislation like the amendments and the creation of in 1965. Discretionary spending's share has declined over decades, from higher proportions in earlier eras, due to mandatory programs' structural growth outpacing appropriated funds, which constrains fiscal flexibility and fuels debates over reining in entitlements versus protecting defense and priorities.
CategoryFY 2024 Outlays (Trillions)Share of Total BudgetKey Examples
Mandatory$4.160%Social Security, , , income security programs
Discretionary$1.827%, , ,
This shapes budgetary dynamics, as mandatory spending's automatic nature limits Congress's without legislative reforms, while discretionary items offer annual adjustment opportunities but face amid rising mandatory and costs projected to exceed 70% of outlays by 2034 per estimates.

International Variations

In parliamentary systems such as the , is classified into Departmental Expenditure Limits (), which cover controllable and predictable outlays for policy delivery and administration, and Annually Managed Expenditure (AME), which includes demand-led items like benefits and payments. , set through multi-year spending reviews, functions analogously to discretionary spending by allowing prioritization within fixed envelopes, for roughly 40-45% of total public expenditure in recent fiscal years. In contrast to the U.S., where discretionary outlays have declined to under 30% of the federal budget, the UK's framework provides greater medium-term stability but still permits annual reallocations subject to parliamentary approval. Canada employs a distinction between voted expenditures, which require annual parliamentary authorization via appropriation acts and resemble discretionary allocations for programs like and , and statutory expenditures, governed by existing statutes such as elderly benefits and employment insurance. For the 2025-26 fiscal year, voted authorities total $222.9 billion, comprising approximately one-third of federal budgetary spending, while statutory items dominate at two-thirds, driven by automatic transfers and fiscal agents' costs. This structure offers more legislative oversight over voted portions than in the U.S., where exceeds 60%, but limits flexibility amid rising statutory demands from demographic pressures. In , the federal budget lacks a formal mandatory-discretionary split but differentiates discretionary fiscal measures—requiring new policy decisions—from automatic stabilizers like indexed pensions and unemployment benefits, which expand cyclically without annual votes. growth has constrained annual budget flexibility, with total reaching 26.7% of GDP in 2023-24, of which policy-discretionary elements in areas like and are subject to and parliamentary review within forward estimates. Unlike the U.S., where appropriations caps target discretionary categories, Australia's process emphasizes medium-term projections, yet automatic spending pressures similarly erode room for elective priorities. European Union member states vary in national classifications, often aligning with COFOG functional breakdowns rather than U.S.-style dichotomies, but the supranational EU budget—equivalent to about 2% of aggregated member public spending—operates largely as discretionary within the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework, with annual adjustments for commitments in cohesion, agriculture, and research totaling €1.074 trillion over seven years. National budgets in eurozone countries increasingly feature expenditure rules under the Stability and Growth Pact, capping flexible spending to maintain deficits below 3% of GDP, as seen in 2023 averages where social protection (mandatory-like) absorbed 20% of OECD-wide outlays. Across OECD nations, the trend toward higher inflexible spending shares—averaging 40-50% controllable in Westminster-influenced systems versus lower in the U.S.—reflects entitlement expansions, reducing policymakers' scope for reallocations amid fiscal constraints. Discretionary spending has declined markedly as a share of total outlays since the early , when it comprised approximately two-thirds of expenditures. In 1962, prior to major expansions in programs, accounted for less than 30% of the , leaving the majority to discretionary categories such as national defense and . This high proportion reflected a postwar emphasis on defense during the and limited mandatory commitments. By 1973, the share had fallen to 53%, as the introduction of and in 1965 began driving mandatory growth. The trend of decline accelerated through subsequent decades due to the expansion of entitlement programs amid demographic aging and legislative changes, outpacing growth in discretionary areas. From 53% in 1973, discretionary spending's share dropped to about 35% by 2013 and further to 27% in fiscal year 2024. As a percentage of GDP, discretionary outlays fell from 12.3% in fiscal year 1962 to around 6% in recent years, with projections indicating near-historic lows. Defense spending, which historically dominated discretionary allocations—comprising about 60% in the 1970s—experienced peaks during the Reagan buildup in the 1980s and post-9/11 conflicts, but overall declined relative to the economy after the Cold War ended in 1991. Nondefense discretionary, covering education, transportation, and justice, followed a similar trajectory, constrained by budget caps like those under the 2011 Budget Control Act.
Fiscal YearDiscretionary Share of Total Outlays (Approximate)Key Factors
1962~70%High ; pre-entitlement expansion
197353%/ growth begins
201335%Post-financial crisis; rising mandatory
202328%Entitlement dominance; recent caps
This shift underscores a structural change in federal priorities, with absolute discretionary dollars increasing in nominal terms but lagging behind mandatory programs' exponential rise due to automatic benefit formulas and . Efforts to restrain discretionary growth, such as the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act's caps, aim to mitigate deficits but face challenges from competing demands.

Recent Developments and Projections

In fiscal year 2024, federal discretionary outlays totaled $1.8 trillion, with nondefense programs comprising more than half of that amount, representing about 27% of total federal outlays and 6.3% of GDP—near historical lows since systematic tracking began. This followed the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which imposed caps on discretionary spending for fiscal years 2024 and 2025, setting a FY2024 defense limit of $868 billion and nondefense at levels yielding a $40 billion reduction in nondefense spending compared to prior baselines—the largest such cut in history. The Act's overall projected deficit reduction reached $1.5 trillion over the 2023–2033 period per (CBO) analysis, primarily through restrained appropriations amid debt ceiling negotiations. For fiscal year 2025, which began October 1, 2024, base discretionary spending limits rose 1% to $1.606 under the , though actual appropriations faced delays via continuing resolutions before finalization. Total federal outlays climbed to an estimated $7.0 , a 4% increase from FY2024, driven more by mandatory programs and net interest than discretionary growth. Defense discretionary allocations emphasized priorities like aid and Indo-Pacific deterrence, while nondefense faced tighter scrutiny, contributing to a FY2025 of $1.8 . CBO projections in its January 2025 Budget and Economic Outlook anticipate discretionary outlays averaging 5.7% of GDP from 2025 to 2035, down from recent levels and lower than the historical average, assuming appropriations track inflation-adjusted historical trends without major shifts. Over the decade, discretionary spending is forecasted at $9.6 trillion and nondefense at $11.5 trillion in nominal terms, growing slower than GDP (1.8–1.9% annually post-2025) due to rising mandatory entitlements and interest costs crowding out flexibility. The long-term outlook to 2055 reinforces this contraction as a share of the , with discretionary falling below past decades' norms unless caps expire or new authorizations expand scopes like or . These baselines exclude potential extensions of the 2017 or unforeseen events, which could pressure future appropriations.

Economic Implications

Macroeconomic Effects

Discretionary government spending influences macroeconomic aggregates primarily through its role in , acting as a tool to stimulate during economic downturns. Empirical studies indicate that increases in discretionary outlays, such as those on or , generate fiscal multipliers typically ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 in the short run, meaning each dollar of spending boosts GDP by that amount via induced consumption and investment. This effect is stronger during recessions when idle resources amplify the multiplier, as evidenced by U.S. data from the where multipliers approached 1.0 for certain discretionary categories. However, in expansions near , multipliers decline toward zero or negative due to reduced slack, with government spending potentially displacing private activity. A key countervailing force is the crowding-out effect, where deficit-financed discretionary spending elevates interest rates by increasing borrowing demand, thereby reducing private investment and net exports. analyses project that sustained high discretionary outlays contribute to this dynamic, lowering capital stock accumulation and long-term GDP growth by 0.1 to 0.2 s annually under baseline debt trajectories. models applied to U.S. data confirm that government spending shocks raise real interest rates by 10-20 basis points per percentage point of GDP increase, partially offsetting demand stimulus. On , discretionary expansions can exert upward pressure when the operates above potential output, as heightened for and labor bids up prices. Post-2021 U.S. fiscal actions, including discretionary supplements, correlated with peaks exceeding 9% in mid-2022, though disentangling effects from remains challenging; structural estimates attribute 0.5-1.0 contributions from spending surges. Conversely, cuts in discretionary spending, as modeled by the , mildly dampen by less than 0.1 annually in the near term by curbing . Employment effects are generally positive in the short term, with discretionary hiring in public sectors and procurement spilling over to private jobs via supply chains. Labor market studies show one-time spending increases raising by 0.2-0.5% per of GDP, though wage pressures and Ricardian saving responses limit persistence. Long-term productivity gains depend on allocation: infrastructure-focused discretionary outlays yield higher returns (multipliers up to 2.0) than consumption-oriented ones, enhancing potential output through capital deepening. Yet, persistent deficits from unchecked discretionary growth risk eroding fiscal space, amplifying vulnerability to shocks as debt servicing crowds out future productive spending.

Fiscal Sustainability Concerns

Persistent federal budget deficits, in which discretionary spending plays a contributory role despite its controllability, underpin concerns over the long-term sustainability of U.S. fiscal policy. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects a $1.9 trillion deficit for fiscal year 2025, with federal debt held by the public reaching 122 percent of GDP by 2035 under current law assumptions that include restrained discretionary growth. This trajectory intensifies as mandatory outlays and net interest expand, but unchecked discretionary allocations—often inflated by emergency supplementals—prevent deficit reduction and sustain primary deficits averaging above 3 percent of GDP. Discretionary spending, projected at 6.3 percent of GDP in 2024 and trending toward historical lows around 5 percent by mid-century, nonetheless adds to absolute pressures amid rising total outlays from 23.3 percent of GDP in 2025 to 26.6 percent by 2055. interest payments are forecasted to climb from 3.2 percent of GDP in 2025 to 5.4 percent by 2055, crowding out discretionary programs and amplifying risks by diverting funds to service rather than productive investments. The CBO's extended baseline highlights that without offsets, such dynamics lead to levels incompatible with , as sustained high s erode fiscal space and elevate vulnerability to shocks or growth slowdowns. The U.S. Treasury Department's Financial Report quantifies a 75-year fiscal gap of 4.3 percent of GDP, where elevated discretionary outlays—particularly non-defense—exacerbate the imbalance by an additional 0.1 points, equivalent to $2.5 trillion in , pushing debt-to-GDP beyond 200 percent by 2049. Addressing this requires enforcing caps on discretionary spending to counter mandatory-driven pressures, as historical mechanisms like the Budget Control Act demonstrated temporary efficacy but were undermined by waivers, underscoring the causal link between lax restraint and accelerating debt accumulation. Absent reforms, analysts warn of potential crises involving higher borrowing costs and diminished policy flexibility, with discretionary categories serving as the primary lever for restoring balance.

Controversies and Policy Debates

Partisan Perspectives on Cuts and Priorities

Republicans have consistently advocated for reductions in non-defense discretionary spending to curb federal deficits, eliminate perceived waste, and reallocate resources toward defense and border security, arguing that such cuts promote fiscal responsibility without significantly impacting essential services. For instance, the administration's 2026 "skinny " proposal, released on May 2, 2025, called for a $163 billion (23 percent) reduction in non-defense discretionary funding compared to the FY 2025 enacted level, while proposing a 13 percent increase in defense spending to $1.01 trillion. This approach targeted programs in , , and , such as eliminating the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (cutting $980 million from its $1.2 billion funding) and reducing non-defense by 21 percent ($42 billion). Republicans, including conservatives, have pushed for over $1 trillion in broader spending cuts in 2025 budget resolutions to offset $4.5 trillion in proposed tax reductions over the decade, emphasizing that non-defense discretionary—comprising about 15 percent of the total —contains duplicative or ineffective programs that can be streamlined. In contrast, Democrats prioritize maintaining or expanding non-defense discretionary allocations for investments in , healthcare, scientific , , and , viewing these as critical for long-term and equity, and often framing proposals as disproportionately harmful to vulnerable populations. The Biden administration's FY 2025 budget request, submitted in March 2024, proposed $1.63 trillion in total discretionary spending, including a 16 percent increase in base non-defense discretionary to $769 billion from $664 billion, with emphases on , workforce development, and housing programs. Democratic leaders, such as House Minority Leader , have opposed partisan spending bills in 2025 that target healthcare and funding, arguing they undermine essential services amid rising needs. Surveys highlight these divides: 89 percent of Democrats favor increased federal spending on healthcare and 85 percent on , compared to preferences for bolstering defense and immigration enforcement. These perspectives reflect broader ideological tensions, with Republicans emphasizing and efficiency—non-defense discretionary fell from 4.4 percent of GDP in 1962 to 2.9 percent in 2023—while Democrats stress domestic investments to address , though both sides acknowledge discretionary spending's limited role (26 percent of the FY 2024 budget) relative to mandatory outlays. Partisan gridlock has persisted, as seen in 2023 debt ceiling negotiations where Republicans sought deeper non-defense cuts, prompting Democratic resistance and reliance on continuing resolutions rather than comprehensive reforms. Critics from conservative outlets argue Democratic priorities exacerbate deficits by resisting efficiencies, whereas left-leaning analyses, such as those from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, contend Republican cuts risk long-term harms like reduced , though such sources exhibit institutional biases toward expanded roles.

Reform Proposals and Criticisms

Various reform proposals aim to constrain or restructure U.S. discretionary spending, which constitutes about 27% of the federal budget in 2024, primarily to address fiscal deficits and promote efficiency. One approach involves reinstating enforceable caps on discretionary outlays, as suggested by the , which expired after 2025 and previously limited growth; such caps would deter the misuse of emergency designations for non-urgent expenditures, potentially saving hundreds of billions over a decade by tying appropriations to baseline projections. The (CBO) outlines options like reducing selected nondefense discretionary spending by specified percentages, estimating $339 billion in savings from 2025 to 2034 through targeted eliminations of lower-priority programs. Similarly, the proposes a 2% annual cut to non-security discretionary spending for three years followed by a two-year freeze, complementing recent bipartisan agreements to curb automatic increases. Other reforms emphasize structural changes, such as performance-based budgeting to evaluate programs on measurable outcomes rather than historical allocations, as critiqued in analyses that highlight the inefficiencies of the annual appropriations process, which has enabled unchecked growth amid declining interest rates masking fiscal risks. The Wharton Budget Model advocates a 5% cut to annual nondefense discretionary spending, arguing it would reduce the federal debt without broadly harming entitlements, which dominate the budget at 70%. These proposals often prioritize defense reallocations or waste elimination, with estimating that shifting funds from duplicative agencies could yield long-term savings while maintaining core functions. Criticisms of such reforms contend that aggressive cuts to discretionary spending, particularly nondefense categories like , , and health grants, risk underinvestment in and public goods essential for economic productivity. For instance, scholars warn that broad reductions, akin to an "axe" rather than a "scalpel," could disrupt federal operations and state services, citing historical precedents where led to deferred maintenance and reduced R&D funding. Progressive outlets like New America highlight "hidden impacts," such as strained local budgets for , arguing that federal cuts shift costs to states and families without addressing mandatory spending's larger share of deficits. Specific domains face targeted objections: proposed reductions in behavioral health grants, as analyzed by the , could exacerbate crises by limiting access to substance use treatment, with evidence from prior measures showing increased emergency care costs. Similarly, the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition criticizes deep cuts in 2026 requests, asserting they undermine more than savings justify, given international affairs' small 1% budget share but outsized strategic returns. Fiscal conservatives counter that such criticisms overlook discretionary spending's vulnerability to pork-barrel politics and that targeted reforms, per , avoid harming the vulnerable by focusing on corporate subsidies and inefficient programs, with empirical data showing no disproportionate impact on low-income groups when entitlements remain intact. These debates underscore tensions between short-term fiscal restraint and long-term growth, with evidence from CBO projections indicating that unchecked discretionary growth contributes to debt trajectories exceeding 100% of GDP by 2034 absent reforms.

References

  1. [1]
    Common Budgetary Terms Explained | Congressional Budget Office
    Dec 2, 2021 · As a share of all federal outlays, discretionary spending has dropped from 60 percent in the early 1970s to 30 percent in recent years. Almost ...
  2. [2]
    Federal Spending | U.S. Treasury Fiscal Data
    Discretionary spending is money formally approved by Congress and the President during the appropriations process each year. Generally, Congress allocates over ...
  3. [3]
    Discretionary Spending in Fiscal Year 2023: An Infographic
    Mar 5, 2024 · Discretionary outlays by the federal government totaled $1.7 trillion in 2023. Outlays for nondefense programs accounted for more than half of that total.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  4. [4]
    How much of the federal budget is discretionary spending? - USAFacts
    The US government spent $6.2 trillion in total in 2023, with $1.7 trillion on discretionary spending, $3.8 trillion on mandatory spending, and $659 billion on ...
  5. [5]
    Understanding Discretionary Spending in the Federal Budget
    Jul 11, 2023 · Discretionary spending is federal spending that must be appropriated by Congress every year. In 2022, it represented a little over a quarter of all federal ...
  6. [6]
    Discretionary Spending in 10 Graphs | Library of Congress
    Aug 22, 2024 · As a percentage of GDP, discretionary spending in FY2024 is projected to be 6.3%, near its historical low since data were first collected in ...
  7. [7]
    Discretionary Expense Definition, Examples, and Budgeting
    A discretionary expense is a non-essential expense. Discretionary expenses are costs without which businesses or households can survive.What Is a Discretionary... · How It Works · Special Considerations · Types
  8. [8]
    Discretionary vs. Mandatory Spending - Equifax
    Discretionary spending, on the other hand, refers to nonessential costs that are not required to keep your household or business running.
  9. [9]
    Consumer Expenditures--2023 - Bureau of Labor Statistics
    Sep 25, 2024 · Selected spending patterns, 2023 --Housing expenditures (32.9 percent of total expenditures) increased 4.7 percent in 2023, after a 7.4-percent ...
  10. [10]
    That Extra Money: A Primer on Discretionary Income | St. Louis Fed
    Aug 6, 2025 · Discretionary income is the money people have for extras, but it's more than that. It's also vital for economic activity, driving business ...
  11. [11]
    Discretionary and Nondiscretionary Services Expenditures during ...
    Jan 15, 2021 · Discretionary services expenditures fell about 30 percent in this recession, dwarfing even the decline recorded in the Great Recession.
  12. [12]
    Discretionary Spending in Fiscal Year 2024: An Infographic
    Mar 20, 2025 · Discretionary outlays by the federal government totaled $1.8 trillion in 2024. Outlays for nondefense programs accounted for more than half of that total.Missing: definition examples trends
  13. [13]
    Non-Defense Discretionary Programs | Center on Budget and Policy ...
    Dec 19, 2024 · Since 2010, NDD spending has been declining as a share of the economy, and in 2019 it reached a record low of 3.1 percent of gross domestic ...<|separator|>
  14. [14]
    What is mandatory and discretionary spending? - Tax Policy Center
    Discretionary spending, set in annual acts, includes defense and education. Mandatory spending, controlled by laws, includes Social Security, Medicare, and ...
  15. [15]
    PGPF Chart Pack: The U.S. Budget - Peterson Foundation
    Aug 6, 2025 · Discretionary spending is determined on an annual basis by Congress and the President through the enactment of appropriations. As opposed to ...
  16. [16]
    Understanding the Federal Budget | Peterson Foundation
    In the 1960s, about two-thirds of total federal spending went to fund discretionary programs. In 2024, discretionary spending was just 27 percent of the budget.
  17. [17]
    Discretionary Spending Options | Congressional Budget Office
    Discretionary spending—the part of federal spending that lawmakers control through annual appropriation acts—totaled about $1.2 trillion in 2013, ...
  18. [18]
    Introduction to the Federal Budget Process
    Oct 28, 2024 · About 61 percent of the federal budget is mandatory spending, 26 percent is discretionary spending, and the rest is interest payments on ...
  19. [19]
    Discretionary Spending Primer - The Concord Coalition
    Jun 23, 2017 · Prior to 1975, more than half of the federal budget consisted of discretionary spending. This meant that lawmakers and the president had the ...Missing: concept | Show results with:concept
  20. [20]
    [PDF] CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET - GovInfo
    The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 was enacted to establish a congressional budget process for the determination of national budget ...
  21. [21]
    Budget | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives
    OBRA included the Budget Enforcement Act, which set caps on additional discretionary spending and introduced the PAYGO rule, which stipulated that a dollar in ...
  22. [22]
    What Is Discretionary Spending? - Experian
    Oct 27, 2023 · Discretionary spending is using money for nonessential expenses like dining out, shopping, entertainment, and subscription services.
  23. [23]
    Consumer expenditures in 2023 - Bureau of Labor Statistics
    Dec 3, 2024 · Despite the slowdown in inflation, average annual expenditures in 2023 were $15,946 higher than in 2020.
  24. [24]
    Your guide to creating a budget plan - Better Money Habits
    Your guide to creating a budget plan · Step 1: Calculate your net income · Step 2: Track your spending · Step 3: Set realistic goals · Step 4: Make a budget plan.
  25. [25]
    How Much Should You Budget for Discretionary Spending? - Experian
    Sep 27, 2023 · The amount depends on income and expenses. The 50/30/20 rule suggests 30% of income for discretionary spending, but this can be adjusted.Missing: BLS | Show results with:BLS<|separator|>
  26. [26]
    The beginner's guide to budgeting with the 50-20-30 rule - Discover
    Feb 6, 2025 · Discretionary spending – 30%: Thirty percent of your budget is for anything you want but wouldn't say you need. It would cover all of your ...
  27. [27]
    CE home : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
    News Releases. Average expenditures for all consumer units in 2023 were $77,280, a 5.9-percent increase from 2022, and average income before taxes increased 8. ...Tables · Public Use Microdata (PUMD) · LABSTAT database · Geographic Data
  28. [28]
    Your Spending Habits Are All in Your Head | Chicago Booth Review
    Feb 27, 2023 · Consumers do some complicated mental accounting when allocating money, and researchers are mapping it.Missing: discretionary | Show results with:discretionary
  29. [29]
    Behavioral Economics and Your Money Habits - Harvard FCU Blog
    Jun 4, 2021 · Behavioral economics looks at how psychology motivates money habits, often in a way that can be detrimental.
  30. [30]
    How can behavioral science help our spending habits? 5 questions ...
    Jun 1, 2023 · This financial psychologist is researching how payment frequency affects perceptions of wealth and spending.
  31. [31]
    The Psychology of Spending: Understanding and Changing Your ...
    Our spending behavior is also influenced by social and cultural factors. Societal norms, peer pressure, and cultural values all shape our financial habits. The ...
  32. [32]
    The effect of self-concept clarity on discretionary spending tendency
    The results indicate that low-SCC individuals have higher discretionary spending tendencies because they are more likely to adopt avoidant coping strategies ...
  33. [33]
    Inside the Psychology of Overspending and How to Stop | Spending
    Financial experts say social pressure, lifestyle creep and emotional impulse spending are common causes. High inflation and credit misconceptions can also be ...
  34. [34]
    Consumer Behaviour during Crises: Preliminary Research on How ...
    We conducted a thorough literature review focusing on the presentation of panic buying and herd mentality behaviours, changes to discretionary consumer ...
  35. [35]
    Assessing the state of household finances in nine charts | Brookings
    Sep 12, 2024 · Consumer spending has been solid, primarily driven by robust goods spending. · Real disposable personal income—an important driver of spending— ...
  36. [36]
    Discretionary Income - Overview, Economic Impact, Example
    Consumer spending levels are strongly influenced by discretionary income. When it rises, households spend more on travel, dining, entertainment, and luxury ...1. Spending · Consumer Spending Trends · Policy Relevance
  37. [37]
    Higher income Americans drive bigger share of consumer spending
    Feb 24, 2025 · Some economists argue that richer households tend to spend more on labor-intensive goods and services, which is good for the job market. But ...
  38. [38]
    The Effect of Consumer Confidence and Subjective Well-being on ...
    Nov 29, 2022 · The paper focuses on the role of consumer confidence and selected well-being measures in aggregate consumption and in subsets of aggregate consumption.
  39. [39]
    [PDF] The Effect of Financial Scarcity on Discretionary Spending ...
    In this section, we discuss our predictions related to how optimistic future perceptions of consumers with scarce financial resources influence their ...
  40. [40]
    The Spatial Analysis of the Impact of Economic Uncertainty on ...
    Mar 4, 2025 · This study examines the effects of economic uncertainty, savings behavior, and the COVID-19 pandemic on household consumption in Taiwan ...
  41. [41]
    How economic stability shapes social relationship expenditures
    Existing studies consistently demonstrate that periods of economic stability encourage higher discretionary spending due to increased financial confidence and ...
  42. [42]
    The federal budget process | USAGov
    Sep 18, 2025 · OMB refers to the agencies' requests as it develops the budget proposal for the president.
  43. [43]
    Introduction to the Federal Budget Process | Congress.gov
    Another significant change in federal budgeting in the 20th century was the advent of direct (or mandatory) spending laws. Although there were 19th century ...
  44. [44]
    Guide to the Federal Budget Process - Bloomberg Government
    Federal spending can be split into three main categories: Mandatory spending, discretionary spending, and net interest. In FY25, about 62% of the budget went ...
  45. [45]
    Federal Appropriations for FY24 - Bloomberg Government
    Jun 3, 2024 · The $1.6 trillion in discretionary spending for FY24 is split between $842 billion for defense programs and $758 billion for nondefense activities.
  46. [46]
    Mandatory Spending in Fiscal Year 2024: An Infographic
    Mar 20, 2025 · Mandatory outlays by the federal government totaled $4.1 trillion in 2024; more than half was for Social Security and Medicare.
  47. [47]
    Trends in Mandatory Spending | Congress.gov
    Nov 7, 2023 · Discretionary spending, an estimated 6.7% of GDP in FY2023, is projected to decline gradually to 6.0% of GDP in FY2033. The two largest ...
  48. [48]
    How did we get to this method of planning public spending? - IFS
    Sep 29, 2015 · DEL (departments' budgets) was meant to be allocated between departments in advance, to spend on relatively stable or predictable items.
  49. [49]
    The spending review: Five things you need to know - Sky News
    Jun 11, 2025 · In short, this spending review is actually only about a fraction - about 41p in every pound - of government spending. You can break it down ...
  50. [50]
    How to understand public sector spending - GOV.UK
    May 29, 2013 · Money within both Departmental Expenditure Limits (DEL) and Annually Managed Expenditure (AME) can be further split into resource spending and ...Missing: discretionary | Show results with:discretionary
  51. [51]
    The Government's Expenditure Plan and Main Estimates for 2025-26
    Jun 4, 2025 · Voted authorities, which require approval by Parliament, total $222.9 billion. Statutory authorities, for which the Government already has ...
  52. [52]
    The Parliamentary Financial Cycle - Library of Parliament
    For the federal government as a whole, statutory expenditures account for approximately two-thirds of federal expenditures, and voted expenditures account for ...
  53. [53]
    Government Expenditure Plan and Main Estimates (Parts I and II)
    The Government Expenditure Plan provides a summary and highlights of year-over-year changes in departmental spending and transfer payments.2024–25 Estimates · 2025–26 Expenditures by... · 2025–26 Statutory Forecasts
  54. [54]
    Online budget glossary | pbo
    Automatic stabilisers can be contrasted with 'discretionary' fiscal policy, which is any policy requiring a new decision by the government.
  55. [55]
    [PDF] Budget 2025–26: Budget Strategy and Outlook: Budget Paper No. 1
    Mar 25, 2025 · 2025–26 BUDGET PAPERS. Budget Speech. No. 1 Budget Strategy and Outlook 2025–26. Contains information on the economic and fiscal outlook,.
  56. [56]
    The Budget Process | Department of Finance
    May 22, 2024 · The Budget process is the decision-making process for allocating public resources to the Government's policy priorities.
  57. [57]
    Government expenditure by function – COFOG - Statistics Explained
    Mar 21, 2025 · This article analyses global trends in the structure of general government expenditure breakdown by their main socio-economic function.Missing: discretionary | Show results with:discretionary
  58. [58]
    Government at a Glance 2025: General government expenditures
    Jun 19, 2025 · General government expenditures across the OECD averaged 42.6% of GDP in 2023 (Figure ‎15.1), confirming a declining trend after the 2020 peak ...
  59. [59]
    [PDF] Medium-term and top-down budgeting in OECD countries
    Nov 3, 2023 · It shows that OECD countries' fiscal frameworks can be characterised by strong reliance on multiple fiscal rules or objectives for enforcing ...
  60. [60]
    Fast Facts about Discretionary Spending | Cato at Liberty Blog
    May 30, 2023 · The Budget Control Act of 2011 capped discretionary spending between 2012 and 2021. For the first six years, discretionary spending declined ...
  61. [61]
    Congress Should Extend Caps on Discretionary Spending
    Jul 24, 2025 · The discretionary spending caps put in place under the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) are scheduled to expire on October 1.
  62. [62]
    [PDF] The Fiscal Responsibility Act Budget Committee Summary and ...
    Largest Non-Defense Reduction Ever: The legislation reduces non-defense discretionary spending by $40 billion (or 5.4 percent)—the largest ever reduction.
  63. [63]
    [PDF] The Fiscal Responsibility Act - COMMITMENT
    Discretionary Spending Limits. Establishes caps on discretionary spending from Fiscal Years (FY) 2024 through 2025. Sets a FY24 defense limit of $868.349 ...
  64. [64]
    How the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 Affects CBO's Projections ...
    Jun 9, 2023 · In its May 30 letter, CBO reported that the Fiscal Responsibility Act would reduce its projections of budget deficits by about $1.5 trillion ...
  65. [65]
    FY 2025 Federal Budget Update
    Dec 27, 2024 · The Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) limits the total base discretionary spending to $1.606 trillion for FY 2025, which is 1% above the FY 2024 limits.Missing: developments | Show results with:developments<|separator|>
  66. [66]
    CBO: FY 2025 Budget Deficit Totaled $1.8 Trillion - AAF
    Oct 9, 2025 · The $8 billion reduction in the deficit between FY 2024 and FY 2025 can be explained by $221 billion in greater mandatory and discretionary ...
  67. [67]
    Treasury Confirms $1.8 Trillion Deficit in FY 2025
    Oct 17, 2025 · The United States borrowed $1.8 trillion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 according to the latest Monthly Treasury Statement from the Treasury ...<|separator|>
  68. [68]
    The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2025 to 2035
    Jan 17, 2025 · In CBO's projections, the federal budget deficit in fiscal year 2025 is $1.9 trillion. Adjusted to exclude the effects of shifts in the timing ...
  69. [69]
    CBO's Discretionary Savings Options-2025-01-28
    Jan 28, 2025 · Over the next decade, the federal government is projected to spend $9.6 trillion on defense discretionary programs and $11.5 trillion on ...
  70. [70]
    The Long-Term Budget Outlook: 2025 to 2055
    Mar 27, 2025 · In CBO's projections, federal discretionary spending is smaller as a percentage of GDP over the next decade than it was in past decades. If ...
  71. [71]
    [PDF] US fiscal compass - EY
    May 8, 2025 · 1. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections assume current revenue and spending law remain unchanged. This assumes the Tax Cuts and Jobs ...<|separator|>
  72. [72]
    [PDF] Fiscal Multipliers : Size, Determinants, and Use in Macroeconomic ...
    Fiscal multipliers can be measured in several ways. Generally, they are defined as the ratio of a change in output (ΔY) to a discretionary change in government ...
  73. [73]
    The COVID-19 Fiscal Multiplier: Lessons from the Great Recession
    May 26, 2020 · The discretionary fiscal responses to COVID-19 are likely to add about $2.4 trillion, approximately 11.2% of 2019 GDP, to the federal deficit, occurring mainly ...
  74. [74]
    Declining Fiscal Multipliers and Inflationary Risks in the Shadow of ...
    Aug 22, 2022 · A 2011 study by Ramey finds that spending multipliers tend to be around 0.3 during periods of low unemployment and close to 1.0 during periods ...Missing: discretionary | Show results with:discretionary
  75. [75]
    Crowding Out Effect: How Government Spending Impacts Private ...
    Aug 23, 2025 · The crowding out effect occurs when increased government spending leads to reduced private sector investment, often because government actions ...
  76. [76]
    Budgetary Outcomes Under Alternative Assumptions About ...
    May 8, 2024 · An increase in federal borrowing would decrease the resources available for private investment (an effect often referred to as crowding out) and ...
  77. [77]
    The Effects of Discretionary Fiscal Policy on Macroeconomic ...
    Oct 1, 2019 · This essay surveys the theoretical predictions and recent empirical Vector Autoregression (VAR) evidence on the short-run effects of ...<|separator|>
  78. [78]
    The Inflationary Risks of Rising Federal Deficits and Debt
    Mar 12, 2025 · This paper argues that elevated federal debt increases the risk of inflationary pressure through several channels in both the short- and the long-term.
  79. [79]
    (PDF) The effects of discretionary fiscal policy on macroeconomic ...
    Aug 10, 2025 · The empirical evidence suggests that government spending shock had a positive impact on output and inflation but the effect was too small.
  80. [80]
    The Economic and Budgetary Effects of Discretionary Funding Caps ...
    Jul 19, 2023 · Macroeconomic Effects. In the short term, the reductions in discretionary spending under both scenarios would result in lower levels of real GDP ...
  81. [81]
    The Macroeconomic Effects of the 2018 Bipartisan Budget Act
    The empirical evidence based on structural VARs suggests instead that consumption increases after a government spending shock, regardless of whether it was ...
  82. [82]
    [PDF] The Macroeconomic Effects of Public Investment: Evidence from ...
    Abstract. This paper provides new evidence of the macroeconomic effects of public investment in advanced economies. Using public investment forecast errors ...
  83. [83]
  84. [84]
    [PDF] Analysis of CBO's March 2025 Long-Term Budget Outlook
    Mar 27, 2025 · Spending has already risen from 20.7 to 23.3 percent of GDP since 2016 and is projected to further increase to 26.6 percent of GDP by 2055.
  85. [85]
    Chairman Arrington Statement on CBO Long-Term Budget Outlook
    Mar 27, 2025 · Interest spending on the national debt is projected to grow from 3.2 percent of GDP in 2025 to 5.4 percent by 2055. Interest payments on the ...
  86. [86]
    Financial Report of the United States Government - Management
    Feb 25, 2025 · A sustainable fiscal policy is defined in this Financial Report as one where the debt-to-GDP ratio is stable or declining over the long term.Missing: concerns | Show results with:concerns
  87. [87]
    Unsustainable US Debt and Impacts of Potential Tax Changes
    Jan 14, 2025 · In this study, we assess current projections of US deficits and debt, establishing the recent history, causes, and consequences of the growing fiscal gap.
  88. [88]
    Trump wants big budget cuts, but not for defense or the border - NPR
    May 2, 2025 · President Trump is proposing $163 billion in cuts to non-defense discretionary spending for the 2026 fiscal year in what's known as a "skinny budget."
  89. [89]
    The White House Office of Management and Budget Releases the ...
    May 2, 2025 · The Budget, which reduces non-defense discretionary by $163 billion or 23 percent from the 2025 enacted level, guts a weaponized deep state.
  90. [90]
    Trump Releases FY 2026 'Skinny' Budget Proposal, Making Cuts to ...
    May 5, 2025 · Currently, the program is funded at $1.2 billion. This proposal would cut that current funding by $980 million. In the budget proposal, the ...
  91. [91]
    Administration's Proposed Cuts to Non-Defense R&D Pose Long ...
    Oct 6, 2025 · President Trump's fiscal year 2026 budget proposes cutting non-defense R&D funding by $42 billion (21 percent). (See Figure 1.) For example:
  92. [92]
    Conservative furor grows over future of DOGE cuts - The Hill
    May 29, 2025 · House Republicans have crafted a suite of proposals seeking to cut federal spending by well more than a $1 trillion in the coming years to ...
  93. [93]
    Republicans want to cut their way to a balanced budget. Can they ...
    Mar 7, 2025 · Within this bill republicans are aiming to cut 2 trillion dollars in spending to accommodate for 4.5 trillion dollars in tax cuts over the next ...
  94. [94]
    The President's FY25 Budget Request - Bloomberg Government
    May 17, 2024 · The Biden administration is proposing $1.63 trillion in total discretionary spending, which is in line with the spending caps established under ...
  95. [95]
    Committee Reacts to Biden Administration's Discretionary Budget
    This includes a 16 percent boost in base non-defense discretionary spending from $664 billion this year to $769 billion next year. A full budget proposal with ...
  96. [96]
    "WE WILL NOT SUPPORT A PARTISAN REPUBLICAN SPENDING ...
    Sep 16, 2025 · House Democrats have been clear that we will not support a partisan Republican spending bill that continues to gut the healthcare of the ...<|separator|>
  97. [97]
    [PDF] Republicans, Democrats Divided over Federal Spending Priorities
    Majorities of Democrats favor increasing federal spending on healthcare (89%), education (85%), Social Security (69%), and improving public infrastructure (69%).
  98. [98]
    A closer look at what's included in the spending that Republicans ...
    Sep 28, 2023 · NPR's Michel Martin speaks with Marc Goldwein, a policy official at the Center for a Responsible Federal Budget, to parse out the reality versus the rancor.
  99. [99]
    A Fiscal Agenda for the 119th Congress | Cato Institute
    Jan 7, 2025 · With enforceable discretionary spending caps expiring after FY 25, legislators should reinstate spending limits, deter the abuse of emergency ...
  100. [100]
    Budget Options | Congressional Budget Office
    Establish Caps on Federal Spending for Medicaid, Dec 2024, $459, $588 ... Reduce Selected Nondefense Discretionary Spending, Dec 2024, $339. Impose a Tax ...
  101. [101]
    Discretionary Spending Caps | Blue Dog Coalition
    Originally enacted under bipartisan agreements in the 1990's, discretionary spending caps have a proven track record of controlling spending and reducing the ...Missing: concept | Show results with:concept
  102. [102]
    Death to “Discretionary” Budgeting | The Heritage Foundation
    Jan 31, 2025 · U.S. federal budgeting has two major categories of spending. The one subject to the most scrutiny is “discretionary” spending, ...<|separator|>
  103. [103]
    Policy Options for Reducing the Federal Debt: Spring, 2024
    Apr 22, 2024 · Cut annual non-defense discretionary spending by 5 percent: Under current law, about 70 percent of the federal budget is for mandatory programs, ...
  104. [104]
    Options for Reducing the Deficit: 2025 to 2034
    Dec 12, 2024 · This report presents 76 options for altering spending or revenues to reduce federal budget deficits over the next decade.
  105. [105]
    Cut the government with a scalpel, not an axe - Brookings Institution
    Nov 18, 2024 · The incoming Trump administration's suggested cuts to the size of the federal government could create serious disruptions if implemented.
  106. [106]
    The Hidden Impact of Federal Budget Cuts - New America
    Jul 1, 2025 · Here are a few examples of how some of the historic cuts and implementation changes being considered at the federal level could have very real consequences for ...
  107. [107]
    Federal Budget Cuts Could Exacerbate Behavioral Health Crisis
    Aug 15, 2025 · Cuts to behavioral health grants threaten access to lifesaving care. The proposed budget would cut spending on mental health and substance use ...Missing: criticisms | Show results with:criticisms
  108. [108]
    Draconian Cuts to Diplomacy and International Assistance Are Not ...
    Jun 3, 2025 · The International Affairs Budget receives the deepest cut of all major departments and agencies in the Administration's FY26 request.Missing: equivalents | Show results with:equivalents
  109. [109]
    Reducing Spending Now: The Key to Growth, Not Austerity
    Jan 16, 2025 · Cutting spending reduces this crowding-out effect by freeing up resources for private-sector investment, creating jobs, and boosting incomes. ...Missing: discretionary | Show results with:discretionary