Final answer:
In fiscal law, authority to use funds must be explicitly granted by law, and absence of prohibition is not a valid authorization. The legislature's budgetary authority influences agency actions, and governments cannot mandate actions without legal authorization, ensuring checks and balances for the use of public funds.
Step-by-step explanation:
In fiscal law, the absence of a law prohibiting you from doing something with your funding does not imply authority to act; authority must be explicitly granted by law to obligate funds. Authority to use public funds is derived from laws and mandates that dictate what can and cannot be done with those funds. For instance, unfunded mandates impose obligations on state and local governments without providing federal funding, often leading to dissatisfaction at these levels.
Furthermore, a legislature's budgetary authority is a vital tool for influencing the actions of agencies within the executive branch. Legislative bodies prioritize funding for agencies that align with their policy goals and can cut budgets for those that don't. It is critical for agencies to adhere to the legislature's direction since no money typically means no execution of projects or initiatives.
Legally, governments cannot require actions that are not authorized by law, emphasizing the principle that any expenditure or action involving public funds must conform to legal authorization. This ensures proper checks and balances within the governmental structure and prevents misuse of public resources.