Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Access for All
Exhibit Hall
Hotels
WiFi
Search Tips
Annual Meeting App
Onsite Guide
This study examines the strategic deployment of “budget talk” in American political discourse—how politicians invoke budgetary constraints to justify policy decisions and shape public debate. While budget deficits are often framed as objective fiscal realities, this research argues that they are discursively constructed and strategically mobilized to advance specific political agendas. Historically, politicians have selectively emphasized budgetary crises to support or oppose government programs, which reflects their broader ideological and partisan priorities. Using computational text analysis, this study systematically traces the evolution of budget talk in the U.S. Congress from 1921 to 2024, identifying when, by whom, and in what policy areas fiscal rhetoric has been employed. The research applies concept mover’s distance, transformer-based models, and large language models to detect budget-related discourse across historical congressional records. It further examines how partisanship and policy domains influence the prevalence and framing of budget talk over time. By analyzing shifts in fiscal discourse, this study aims to reveal the rhetorical strategies underlying political debates on government spending. The findings contribute to scholarship on political discourse and fiscal sociology by highlighting how the “discourse of scarcity” has been used to constrain government action. Moreover, the study introduces the concept of fiscalization—the strategic framing of policies in budgetary rather than moral terms—as a critical mechanism in budgetary politics. In an era of persistent debates over government spending, this research underscores how budgetary justifications are not neutral descriptions of economic necessity but powerful rhetorical tools that shape policy outcomes.