ARTICLE
TITLE

POLITICAL BUDGET IN ARRANGING LOCAL INCOME AND EXPENDITURE BUDGET OF SUNGAI PENUH TOWN IN 2012 DOI :10.15575/jispo.v9i1.4479

SUMMARY

Budgeting process is a political activity that is the monitoring tool for society toward government. This process will involve various elements which have an interest in the budget arranging process. They are not only Executive element, but also Legislative. The purpose of this research is to analyze the dynamics of Allocation Budget Contestation of Direct Expenditure in Arranging Local Income and Expenditure Budget (APBD) of Sungai Penuh Town in 2012. This research is descriptive research by using a qualitative approach. The location is chosen to help the researcher to understand the problem of research. The location is determined purposely and based on the problems that happened in the field that related to Political Budget in Arranging Local Income and Expenditure Budget process of Sungai Penuh Town in 2012. The Location is in the Government of Sungai Penuh Town and around the society. Triangulation technique is chosen in this research because it uses some data from interview and documentation. According to Principal and Agent Theory, there are 4 stages in the budgeting process. They are Executive planning, Legislative Approval, Executive Implementation, and Ex-pose Accountability. Based on the result of this research, Dynamics of Allocation Budget Contestation of Direct Expenditure in Local Income and Expenditure Budget of Sungai Penuh Town are: 1) there is a Mutual Coordination Relationship between Executive and Legislative in Arranging Local Income and Expenditure Budget process. It stars from composing General Budget Policies–Provisional Budget Priorities and funding Level (KUA-PPAS) and Integrated Work Plan and Budget (RKA) and the agreement between Mayor and Sungai Penuh Legislative. 2) In interdependence, there are political domination and transaction among institutions in arranging until determining Local Regulation. Domination is between Executive and Legislative. 3) Negotiation (Lobbying) evidence in Executive and Legislative relationship. Legislative doesn’t have an authority to make work plan, but Legislative can change the budget even they can change the program that they want. It makes negative negotiation happens.

 Articles related

Delly Maulana,Endang Larasati,Sri Suwitri,Kismartini Kismartini    

In actualizing the Regional Government Budget (APBD) as an instrument for the desired social changes and in accordance to the purpose for decentralization, there needs to be the involvement of the civil society, community groups, and other stakeholders i... see more


Salahudin Salahudin,Vissanu Zumitzavan,Achmad Nurmandi,Tri Sulistyaningsih,Kisman Karinda    

Since political reform in 1998, the Indonesian government has decentralized governance practices in order to provide a space for local governments to develop the local potential of each region. Consequently, the local government should be responsive to p... see more


Elizabeth Kidder    

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the largest integrated health system in the U.S. with 7.9 million U.S. veterans enrolled.  Both the number of veterans seeking VHA health services and the cost of delivering such services continue to rise as a ... see more


Salahudin Salahudin,Achmad Nurmandi,Kisman Karinda,Tinuk Dwi Cahyani    

ABSTRACTThis paper tries to analyze and utilizes qualitative document content analysis as a means of understanding rent- seeking practices in fiscal policymaking processes. This study revealed that rent-seeking practices in fiscal policymaking in Malang ... see more


Fardini Sabilah,Suparto suparto,Salahudin Salahudin    

The objective of the current study is to map regency and Municipality government budget allocations in East Java Province, Indonesia. The study uses quantitative and qualitative approaches. The quantitative approach is related to the use of numerical dat... see more