Congress has been more willing to work around the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act
and the Budget Control Act of 2011 than the prohibition on Native American treaties, the Base Closure and Realignment, or (until recently) Senate Rule XXII.2.
The mandatory deficit reduction provisions of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act
once again make the VA health care system a target for a 2% reduction ($240 million) in funding availability for direct health care programs and significantly greater amounts for indirect and administrative amounts for indirect and administrative aspects of the program.
Reality faded further in 1985, when the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act
began requiring the budget to meet an annual deficit reduction target.
The revised deficit for 1987 is $158.4 billion, and for 1988, $123.3 billion, Both are higher than the targets specified in the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act
(formally, the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985).
On the record, VOA officials blamed Wick's move on the constraints imposed by the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act
, although VOA-Europe's $2.3 million budget for fiscal 1987 is just a drop in the U.S.I.A.
Among its more startling conclusions: the true budget of the 1970s was typically in surplus,1 not deficit (which explains why monetarist economists mistakenly concluded that deficits do not stimulate demand); the recession of 1980-82 was partly caused by a truly tight fiscal policy, despite record official deficits by 1981; and finally, the balanced budget intended by the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act
of 1985 would create a sufficiently large surplus when properly measured to "threaten the worst recession or depression in half a century.'