Constitution Watch: The Case for a Balanced Budget Amendment
July 14th, 2011
Our country is facing record debts and deficits that seem almost impossible to dig out of. It’s hard to imagine that we actually had a balanced budget less than ten years ago, and the big concern in Washington was that the national debt was actually decreasing too quickly (if only that was the big debate today). Now, runaway spending and big government practices have led to our current fiscal nightmare, and for the first time in a long time, the country’s perfect credit rating is in serious jeopardy, and the chances of having a balanced budget anytime soon are fading fast.
One way to force the government to balance the budget would be a constitutional amendment mandating it, which is being proposed by a growing number of fiscal conservatives inside and outside the Beltway. One proposal that is gaining steam, backed by Virginia Congressmen Morgan Griffith and Bob Goodlatte, would force the government to have a balanced budget each year unless a supermajority decides against it, which given the new spirit of deficit reduction that has taken over, would be difficult to do. Some critics are calling this a revolutionary measure, and a set up for disaster, largely based on the discredited Keynesian theory that deficit spending in a recession is good (that stimulus actually saved the country, just ignore the jobs numbers, unemployment rate, double-dip housing market recession, inflation, and that stubborn deficit). How messed up does a country have to be if the very concept of spending only what you take in is considered radical?
Apparently according to 49 state legislatures, it isn’t such a radical idea after all, since they have constitutional amendments mandating balanced budgets. If the states can function under such constraints, why can’t Washington? In 1997, a similar amendment missed by one vote in the Senate, so it’s not entirely without precedent in Washington, and this was during a time when the fiscal situation was good.
Of course, amending the Constitution is a bigger deal than simply passing a law, which is why it has only been done 17 times since the Bill of Rights was passed, with the most recent amendment coming in 1992. According to Article V of the Constitution, any proposed amendment must pass the House and Senate by a two-thirds vote, and be ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures (around 39 states). This process could take years to work its way across the country, let alone make it through Congress. Pro-amendment Senators Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) have stated that all 47 Republican Senators support the amendment. Also, numerous Democratic senators have at some point supported similar amendments in the past, and could be counted on to vote for it again with a little encouragement.
Hopefully this proposal stays in the discussion as the debt ceiling and deficit talks continue. Every family in the country and nearly every state has to live within its means, even if that means cutting back on popular spending programs and “sacred cows”. Washington should be leading by example, and it doesn’t matter what the economic situation is, surplus or deficit, fiscal restraint should be the motto for Congress, so that we don’t wind up in a situation like we’re in right now.
