That being said, I'm getting tired of the political spin surrounding the current push by the Republicans for a Balanced Budget Amendment so I thought I'd post the actual bill language so we can all make up our own minds.
Here it is:
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to balancing the budget.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:
`Article--
`Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless two-thirds of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a roll call vote.
`Section 2. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed 18 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States for the calendar year ending before the beginning of such fiscal year, unless two-thirds of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific amount in excess of such 18 percent by a roll call vote.
`Section 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which--
`(1) total outlays do not exceed total receipts; and
`(2) total outlays do not exceed 18 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States for the calendar year ending before the beginning of such fiscal year.
`Section 4. Any bill that imposes a new tax or increases the statutory rate of any tax or the aggregate amount of revenue may pass only by a two-thirds majority of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress by a roll call vote. For the purpose of determining any increase in revenue under this section, there shall be excluded any increase resulting from the lowering of the statutory rate of any tax.
`Section 5. The limit on the debt of the United States shall not be increased, unless three-fifths of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide for such an increase by a roll call vote.
`Section 6. The Congress may waive the provisions of sections 1, 2, 3, and 5 of this article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war against a nation-state is in effect and in which a majority of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide for a specific excess by a roll call vote.
`Section 7. The Congress may waive the provisions of sections 1, 2, 3, and 5 of this article in any fiscal year in which the United States is engaged in a military conflict that causes an imminent and serious military threat to national security and is so declared by three-fifths of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress by a roll call vote. Such suspension must identify and be limited to the specific excess of outlays for that fiscal year made necessary by the identified military conflict.
`Section 8. No court of the United States or of any State shall order any increase in revenue to enforce this article.
`Section 9. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except those for repayment of debt principal.
`Section 10. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays, receipts, and gross domestic product.
`Section 11. This article shall take effect beginning with the fifth fiscal year beginning after its ratification.'.
At first read it seems fairly sensible to me but then I'm not a lawyer and we all know how even the simplest language can be twisted. That being said, I'd be interested to hear the opinions of others about specific problems that they may think are not addressed in the bill.
The one thing I do know is that America is broke and on the verge of financial and political collapse. If we don't get our act together and start living within our means, no matter how painful this is going to be, we're done. I think that a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution is the only way to bind the hands of our politicians, both current and future.
Like it our not, the days of big government are over because we simply can't afford it. Better to take the hit on our own terms than to have it forced on us by others.
Well, enough writing, time to go back to the garden.
Posts
I wish the Constitution Party had a serious chance. I despise the Democrats, but I don't trust the Republicans to stand firm. They are like limp spaghetti.
ReplyDeleteIoannes (have trouble on Windows 7 with blogger letting me make comments using by blogger profile)
My wife has the same problem with Internet Explorer. Using Google Chrome seems to solve the problem.
ReplyDeleteI don't trust the Republicans, either. Right off the bat, as much as I like a Balanced Budget Amendment I can see the possibilities for sidestepping it. One that comes immediately to mind is since they are saying that the budget can't exceed 18% of GDP. I have to wonder why there is no mention of how the GDP figures will be arrived at. I can see all kinds of accounting tricks being used to get around this restriction.
Typical of a theist; selective interpretation of facts mixed with wishes and delusions leads to a deeply unrealistic conclusion.
ReplyDeleteOh and isn't it weird how the GOP only brings this nonsense up when they're not in power? When they had control of the White House and other bits of the government bumping the ceiling was done with no complaint suddenly it's the MOST IMPORTANT THING EVER! In fact the last time it was brought up was when Clinton was President.
Weird huh?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Oh and isn't it weird how the GOP only brings this nonsense up when they're not in power?"
ReplyDeleteIsn't funny how the words liberal and liar seem to fit so well together?
Between April 29, 1975 and January 29, 1980, 34 petitions from 30 different state legislatures were submitted to Congress on the subject of a Balanced Budget Amendment.
Ford, a republican, was president during those first couple of years.
And isn't typical of a lying lib to complain about something when republicans are doing it, and then give his approval when it's the democrats doing the same thing?
...
ReplyDeleteWow.
Petitions from State legislators.
Three decades ago.
How insightful and relevant.
And where was the "Tea Party" and all these petitions when Bush Jr was running up the deficit?
You do know that Clinton left Bush with a surplus right? That if you truly cared about balancing budgets you'd be voting Democrat because they, y'know, did it?
But like I said it doesn't matter to you, you don't even understand the economics of it, all you know is that when Rush, FoxNews and the GOP tell you to start bleating about something you do it, when they tell you to stop you do.
The funny and sad thing is they don't even have to give you a biscuit for reward. Their attention and giving you the illusion of empowerment is more than enough reward.
"Petitions from State legislators."
ReplyDeleteFunneled through their dumbocratic congressman of course. But then, you do know that it was the dumbs who had the majority when Ford was in office, right?
"Three decades ago."
Many of those congressmen are still in office. Haven't you heard? They consider it lifetime employment.
"How insightful and relevant."
No one said you could see relevance from the bottom half of the IQ spectrum.
"And where was the "Tea Party" and all these petitions when Bush Jr was running up the deficit?"
Um… feeling unneeded I suppose since the only thing Bush ran up was a very necessary war budget of less than a measly trillion bucks while idiot dumbocrats caused a housing collapse of MANY trillions. Ever hear of the community reinvestment act? Guess that was before your time kiddo like most things apparently since you have so little knowledge of the world. It was something dumb dems did that allowed any black in the gutter with a bottle in his hand and no means of employment to get a loan for a house. It led directly to sub-prime mortgages, something dems have done their level best to keep deregulated for decades. I don't suppose you recall that when the house banking committee took a vote on regulating Fannie and Freddie a few years ago that every single dem on the committee voted against it while every republican voted for it. Of course throwing money away that they don't have is typical of dems and always has been if you knew any history at all. Democratic congressmen in bed with financial/banking institutions, building firms, insurance companies, and the mob has been going on since I was a boy, and the only way it will ever change is if you kill every one of them because the mob has its fingers in everything—something they couldn't do without their democratic helpers to make sure everything stays nice and deregulated where money and loans are concerned. You know, there's a reason why every known mob boss for the past three or four decades has been caught putting money in a democrat's pocket and why anyone who ever went to prison on union racketeering charges was out campaigning for dems.
"You do know that Clinton left Bush with a surplus right?"
You do know that Clinton's signing of APEC, NAFTA, and ASEAN foreign trade bills sent half our engineering and IT jobs off the India, China, and Mexico leading directly to the dotcom bust in 1999 and the recession that followed, right? Now Obama is filling his cabinet with former Clinton financial advisers. Gee, I wonder what the result will be? No, wait, we already know.
"all you know is that when Rush, FoxNews and the GOP"
Don't know too much about them really. I'm too busy watching members of the Chicago mob walking in and out of the democratic federal judges chambers in the E St Louis court house on an almost daily basis. The same mob that helped get Obama elected and that has kept Daily's crooked machine in power for 50 years.
Of course, if you really want to educate yourself on the mob and the democratic machine, you can start by reading this article on Obama's mob ties and how he got federal subsidies for one Chicago slumlord after another while he was a senator. One in particular, Cecil Butler, had 1800 code violations. Valerie Jarrett was in charge of the Grove Parc complex which received a score of 11 on a 100 point scale and was eventually ceased by the government.. She, like all the other slumlords, contributed many thousands of dollars to Obama's campaigns. She now sits on his cabinet.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy
"The funny and sad thing is they don't even have to give you a biscuit for reward."
I could ask for nothing finer than bread. Now go eat your chitlins like a good little dumbocrat.
So that would be no, you can't show the GOP screaming about deficits while Bush was running them up?
ReplyDeleteYou know that Bush also raised the debt ceiling with no GOP objection right?
I think you are easily confused, perhaps you should read up on the subject and then make a response and that way you won't talk about a bunch of stuff that has nothing to do with it.
You also don't seem to understand that Clinton, the Democrat President balanced the budget and it's weird that you seem to think that very important but still hate Democrats.
It's almost like as Democrats must always be wrong and the GOP must always be right in your mind thus facts don't matter.
I'm guess you are a theist as well.
Look kid, when you've got an argument, wake me. I've got a low tolerance for stupidity. And as a guy around here used to say, "You can't fix stupid."
ReplyDeleteNow why don't you do your daddy a favor; pull-up your pants and pretend you're a man for the rest of the day.