E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe House fell short of the votes necessary to approve a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in a largely sybolic exercise on Friday afternoon.
The House voted, 261 to 165, in favor of the amendment, which would prohibit federal spending in any fiscal year from exceeding tax receipts for that year. Bottom line, it would make it impossible for the federal budget to add to the deficit. While a majority of the chamber favored the measure, two-thirds of the House -- 290 members -- is needed to approve an amendment to the Constitution.
All but four Republicans favored the amendment, while Demoocrats split, 25 in favor, and 161 against.
One of the most surprising votes against the amendment was Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), the fiscally hawkish chairman of the House Budget Committee.
"I’m concerned that this version will lead to a much bigger government fueled by more taxes," Ryan said in a statement. "Spending is the problem, yet this version of the BBA makes it more likely taxes will be raised, government will grow, and economic freedom will be diminished. Without a limit on government spending, I cannot support this Amendment."
Other Republicans joining in the "no" vote were Rep. David Dreier (R-CA), the chairman of the House Rules Committee, and Reps. LOuie Gohmert (R-TX) and Justin Amash (R-MI).
The vote was required as part of the law that created the supercommittee this sumer; its inclusion was mostly a symbolic nod to conservative Republicans in Congress, who had initially rejected packages to defuse the debt ceiling crisis this summer that lacked such an amendment.
Democrats had been somewhat divided over the measure, though party leaders in the House had opposed it. Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) actively courted Democratic votes against the amendment, and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), a member of the supercommittee and ranking member of the House Budget Committee, recently sent a letter to fellow Democrats urging them to vote "No" on the measure.
"A Constitutional amendment that cannot easily be enforced to balance the budget is a hollow gesture that at the very least will be ineffective," Rep. Van Hollen said in the letter, "At the very worst, a balanced budget amendment enshrined within the Constitution could generate a Constitutional impasse with catastrophic consequences."
However, the 25-member Blue Dog Coalition, a group of fiscally conservative Democrats, had released a letter on Thursday in support of the amendment.
Today's vote on the BBA is not without historical precedent. In 1995, the BBA passed the House with bipartisan support (including that of Rep. Steny Hoyer, who is now whipping against it). It moved to the Senate where it fell one vote short of passing.
The version of the BBA that the House will voted on today was a concession by conservative Republicans who wanted to introduce a much stronger version that would require a 2/3rd majority to raise taxes in the future. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) said earlier this week that he would "like to see us vote on the stronger BBA."
But GOP aides have said they settled on this version because it had a better chance of passing. According to Erica Elliot, who is a spokeswoman for House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), this version puts the ball in the Democrats court. "The American people overwhelmingly support a Balanced Budget to the Constitution and our Members chose to bring this bill to the floor because it has the best chance of passage," Elliot said, "We'll see if the Democrats support the will of their constituents."
The Senate is also required to vote on the BBA before the year ends, but that will not happen until after Thanksgiving.
Leave a Comment:
I truly wish people would stop treating the finances of this country to how you would treat your piddly little household finances. It's much large and infinitely more complex then a household budget. Your rainy day fund might be a thousand or so, good for you. A country the size of the USA needs a rainy day fund of several billion dollars if not much, much more. A balanced budget plan could not make allowances for monies needed in times of emergencies. There are endless variences that can't be accounted for. You can't tie a presidents hand like this. It makes it hard for him/her to act during emergencies. Fortunately there are some clear thinkers that helped put a stop to this rediculous exercise.
The President doesn't determine the budget and spending Congress does. That aside, they have all demonstrated that they are not capable of exercising fiscal restraint, so we have to force them by mandating it through the Constitution.
BTW, there is nothing to prevent the establishment of a surplus, or rainy day fund, under a balanced budget amendment.The amendment doesn't require the government to spend every dollar it raises. It only requires that the government not spend more that it raises in revenues, In other words, no deficit spending and debt creation.Surpluses are fine.
And if you think we have a rainy day fund now, than you are delusional. Plus the amendments typically have provisions in them for deficit spending in emergencies. Stop making lame excuses to avoid fiscal responsibility.
I'm not. I just don't think simplistic See Dick and Jane run balanced budget amendments are in this nations best interest. The tea party acts like it's a piece of cake and it isn't. The President cannot have his hands tied in times of natural disasters or national emergencies. That is what would happen with one of these misguided amendments. You can't account for every contingency.
There is no way you will ever get this kind of thing ratified in all of the states you would need to. There are too many intelligent people out here that would see the folly and vote NO!
The libs will never go for any type of fiscal restraint, they simply want to ring all of the money they can out of the producers so that they can hand it to their constituency (i.e. the non-producers, welfare queens, union members, oops, I already mentioned non-producers, same difference.....).
Why is it you people always say that crap. It's like if I say all conservatives are bigots. It's not true.
I am all for fiscal responsibility but I am against simplistic remedies that are doomed to failure. You have to actually look beyond your nose and take a close look at the ramifications of what you're doing. Try it sometime. It only hurts a little bit.
So J.H.,why turn a good discussion into a 5th grade name calling contest. But since you brought up the union thing,of which I am not a member,I thought I would try to drag you back into a real discussion. Don't get me wrong,I like lobbing grenades now and then,but to blame unions is backwards. Simply put,corporations invented unions,that's right,so they could get and keep a better,more productive work force. Once they had that work force in place,through fair wages and decent benefits,they saw their profits soar.The railroads were a classic example. So now we are to believe that we can kill the unions and the corporations will DO THE RIGHT THING..............Not in our lifetime...or our children's,which this is really all about.
Cowboy,
I don't think JH is capable of adult discussions. He's kind of locked into this 5th grade name calling thing. It was cute when he was in the fifth grade, now, not so much. It must be scary not being capable of adult discussions.
Yea,he really hates......
If your trying to figure out why we can't have a serious dialogue with you people you only need to read this crap:
Well thought out........
Funny, I don't see you offering any solutions; just that you believe a balanced budget intitiative won't work. Frankly, you give yourself away as fairly naive if you think that "several billion dollars" would consititute a rainy day fund. As for balancing the budget being a "piece of cake", frankly, it is. We simply have to tackle the tough issues and the libs won't do so. Entitlement spending is out of control and needs to be reigned in as, with all government programs, they have spun out of control well beyond their original intended purpose. Obviously Military spending has to be cut and myraid of other things. Simply start with getting rid, over a few years, the Department of Education and it's $79 Billion budget (and they actually do what??).
Your turn..........
Dennis ,ya spose he might be spending Friday night alone.....that's all I can figure.
We went at the same time their JH. So if its my turn....The BIG numbers that you fail to bring up are ones like the 4 trillion we have in Iraq in search of those wascally weapons of mass destruction,or better yet,the 4 trillion we saved by Obama using his head and taking out Khadafy,instead of going the GW Bush route again. In fact Libya paid us back our cost's....when was the last time ya saw that happen.....OH,and no U.S. soldiers died.....
And you call me naive. This is a very complex, robust economy and the last thing we need is a bunch of rookies trying to make wholesale, not very well thought out changes to it. If you're going to do it, actually understand what you're doing and look a little down the road at any unplanned ramifications. To just throw together some ridiculous balanced budget amendment and expect the whole country to be wowed by it is what's naive.
Oh, and throwing out the Dept of Education, bad idea. We would then have 50 different ideas of how a school should operate and different text books, etc, etc, etc. And frankly, I would hate to see what some of our more backward states would do. All intelligent design, all day and night. No thanks.
Come on now cowgirl. It's fairly apparent that neither you nor Dennis has much to say other than spewing some talking points you've garnered from Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow. As for the Unions, please, they priced themselves out of the Private economy and the Public Sector as well (the latter was simply hidden from the general public until very recently).
So tell me, what is it that I said that is a talking point from any of those folks.
Also, unions only make up 12% of America's workforce at best. So just give it a rest with that. It's a straw dog and nothing more. I don't believe anything is hidden from view. Most of us who bother to actually read and research things know these things. I've found that using multiple news sources helps develop an informed, intelligent viewpoint.
Taxes need to be raised. There is no reason to decrease spending. Maybe cut out some of the graft and corruption will save some money, but entitlements should see increased spending, not decreased.
Spoken like a true lib..........
Social Security assets in 2010 were $2.6 trillion, an amount that is expected to be adequate to cover the next 10 years. The program is not projected to run out of money until 2036 without legislative action.
There is no urgent need to cut benefits. The program doesn't need to be cut at all. The current level of benefits can be sustained till at least 2079 with a combinations of reforms, including an increase in the payroll tax, raising the retirement age to 70, and 1% reduction in the COLA.
JH- That is why the smart republicans did not vote for this. If you have a balanced budget and some catastrophe strikes, it means an automatic tax hike to offset the costs to keep you in balance.
I know as long as I have been alive I have never seen billionaires go before congress begging for a tax hike,what's that tell ya... It tells me that (here come the grenades) that the GOP has one goal,which McConnell clearly stated,stop Obama!!! F America,F the economy,F the middle class...we just want THAT guy outta here. VERY PATRIOTIC !!!! Also very transparent !!!
Also very necessary to restore some fiscal sanity and get us off of the road to becoming a European Socialist state (see Greece, Italy, et al for how that's working out......). Now run along Cowboy, your in a bit over your head.......
Oh thank you daddy.......
JH.
How many dollars in manufacturing output does Greece and Italy have again??
Goat Cheese and Olive Oil.
Are you as dumb as you sound?
The only thing wrong with this country is there are few people like you in it.
So JH,would you grace me with your eternal wisdom on this....The first year of the Obama Presidency the economy contracted at a rate of 9%,are ya still with me,ok,that is without any of his policies being in effect yet. So I'm just sayin',that economy GW turned over to him might not have been doing very well,But every year since,while it was a slog,the economy has grown,Not at all enough,but still,that was with your brethren doing every thing they can to screw things up. So I think maybe I may be over my head with you...kinda like if I fell in a septic pool....
crickets.....
Fantastic.
A failure of epic proportions.
The GOP and their candidates are engaged in an epic struggle of back-biting and pinching.
I can tell which one is gonna win.....OBAMA 2012 !!!!
Cain declared today that we need leaders, not readers. This was to explain how he doesn't feel the need to know anything about foreign policy. That's not just a little frightening, it's a whole lot frightening. Tea party folks, tell us again why you want this guy?
Oh,I thought he said "breeders not reader's",.....these damn hearing aids....
I have to say though,that Newt fella sure is doing well.....
Speaking of hearing aids. He is doing well. Making money hand over fist.
Hey Dennis,just so ya don't think I'm crazy. I made a pledge to Grover Washington,or Grover on Sesame street(I don't recall) that I wouldn't say anything bad about that silly little guy,Newty. This is my way of doing all I can for the RE-ELECT OBAMA campaign......so anyway....isn't that Newt the bee's knee's....(shhhhh)
There was a little boy outside the grocery store yesterday with 6 puppies in a box,and I asked him if the puppie were Republican or Democrats,(just to have some fun with him),and he says "their republicans".I just laughed and went on my way. I was with my wife tonight and we stopped by the store,and there he was with his puppies again. I told my wife to ask him again,and to my surprise he said ,their all Democrats !!! I said how's that,and he says,"thats easy mister,their eyes are open today...."
HAAHAAHAA
Cowboy, you're killing me!
Its looking really bleak for gop/tb in 2012. Kinda looks like they will lose control of house, senate and prez. They have proven to be the worst group of gop's in usa history. Its all over .......big changes are coming at city, county, state and federal levels by recall, resign, remove and ousted. Americans have had enough of the circus and destruction of America.
We just need to not get complacent and keep the pressure on for people to get out and VOTE!!!!
Indeed, first on the list to get rid of: Obamacare
You're right- you are evil
The person who wants to vote out all the "no"s on BBA. Sorry, but you only get to vote in your own district. No political-agenda type amendmennt is likely to pass because both houses have to pass it by a two-thirds vote in each house. This is in the Constitution so it won`t be amended on a whim. Anyhow balancing any government buget is a farce, because it`s just bookkeeping. No relevanze to actual income and outgo. So it`s nothing but show and tell. Occasionally some poster refers to impeachment. Same thing, two-thirds in the senate. Not likely.
The democrats are like little children that have thier parents credit card..can't stop spending other peoples money.
The reason Ryan voted no was there was no cap on the spending , in short they could spend all they want and raise taxes to pay for it , Ryan ask for %18 of GDP cap ,
QUESTION how much debt is to much or enough , How much or what percentage is enough of GDP, IS IT OK TO BORROW THE MONEY TO PAY THE INTEREST ON LOANS DUE , How much should taxes be ,what is the limit , and What is going to happen when all the so called rich are either out of money or left the country which they are doing , WHO PAYS THE BILL THEN ,
The Republicans have said ENOUGH IS ENOUGH ,I really want to know where the Democrats stand , WHEN will we reach the point that the Democrats say enough is enough
The Republicans have said NOTHING in this bill. If you actually look at this bill beyond the catchy title it is so full of holes it is worthless. It should have been passed by an overwhelming majority of both party's just to give the illusion they are trying. They could not even do that. It really does not bind Congress to much of anything. It requires moderate majority of votes to override anything at any time. All they do is use a pile of mathamatical illusions to still do whatever they want. They can declare "military emergency" "iminent danger" "too big to fail" etc and skate right by the amendment doing whatever they please for as long as they please. Same thing FDR did with declaring "martial law" so he could throw the Constitution in the trash and do whatever he please financially.
The taxes and spending simply have to be moved back to the states who cannot borrow to support endless unfunded spending. The states are bound by REAL balanced budget amendments and have to choose what they want and can afford. The rest simply has to go. The federal government will not do a thing to cut spending. They literally built the entire $3.7 trillion dollar budget completely around their lobby's and special interests. They can't cut one nickel without losing votes or campaign money. Left/Right are all the same. It is the federal structure that is the problem. They have WAY too much power and are out of control.
We have to stop the deluded illusion the federal government is somehow going to fix itself. At this point changing party's or politicians and expecting change is like changing your socks and expecting to be a different person.
Federalism, socialism and democracy are all miserably failing into a black hole of debt. This is specifically why the founders built a free Republic with strong states and no way for the voters to get to the credit line of the country.
"When the people can vote themselves money it will herald the end of the Republic" Ben Franklin
Lets take a walk down memory lane.... #43 George W. Bush = 8 years of spend, spend, spend
#42 William J. Clinton =8 years, surplus
#41 George H. W. Bush = 4 years, tax increase
#40 Ronald Reagan = 8 years spend and tax increase
So in the past 30 years who did more spending and taxing with nothing to show? This proves the Republican platform is based on lies!!!
Let's look at the bubbles the Federal Reserve orchestrated with the Congress and Presidents of those time periods.
Clinton - GOP tech bubble orchestrated. A chimp could have come out smelling like a rose by raiding the Social Security surplus. Bubble burst on Bush.
Bush - FED & Democrats orchestrated housing bubble. It burst on Bush and Obama
Obama - FED & Democrats orchestrated TARP, AIG, GM etc etc etc bailout
Obama - Federal Reserve shoving $16 trillion out the back door to foreign banks in 2010. Still shoving money out the back door with no accountability. Ron Paul demanded FED audit and Obama fought it saying nothing was wrong. He still says nothing is wrong even though it is raining US dollars all over Europe.
Next poor sucker - Stuck with 3 wars and another in Syria and Uganda as soon s the election is over. Stuck with double the national debt, a depression, 10% unemployment and the Federal Reserve keeping the country in a depression while they print whatever they please, loan it to themselves at 0% interest then buy up all our homes, business's and stocks at 20 cents on the dollar.
The whole federal system is corrupted beyond any hope of repair. It is just picking up speed and it does not matter which party is in control of what. You are a fool if you believe one of these totally corrupted party's completely run by legacy lobby's is going to ride in on a white horse and save us all.
Nothing you said changed any of the facts....the GOP funnels billions into the defense and the wealthy's pockets (tax cuts) every chance they get. Face the facts, the Republicans spend, spend, spend every time they are in office. Again, the Republican platform is based on lies, PERIOD!!!! Also, I never said he Democrats are not guilty of corruption. I was responding to the many posts by GOP supportes stating all Democrasts want to do is tax and spend.
Both parties "funnel" billions off to defense. The Democrats no longer propose any defense cuts and the GOP won't cut entitlements. We lost the left/right system of checks and balances we once had. Now they both just spend their butts off and make all the excuses in the world to do it.
The party lobby's run Washington and its budget. You are a complete fool if you can't see that. Take the time to look at the defense cutting proposals made by the Democrats over the last 4 years............ZERO
Even when Obama pulled out troops he replaced them with defense contractors at 4 times the cost......... 160,000 of them! It is a complete joke.
Reality check for the GOP, either take the side of the people or go kneel down before the Koch Brothers. It still amazes me that's a hard choice for some in the Republican side.
They are elected representatives, the vast majority of their constituents are not billionaires, so how is this a hard choice?
Good Ole Phonies they are!
Ha, ha what a joke, several self made millionaires showed up to support the protesters in taxing the rich.
When asked by a journalist if they would like to make $2000 donation to a Treasury Dept official that was present, they sheepishly stumbled and stuttered declining to.
Money talks, bs walks and apparently hypocrisy was at its highest. That also goes for Mr.Ttax me more Buffett, who still is fighting the IRS about a $billion in back taxes regarding Berkshire Hathaway. He can write that check anytime but won't.
You know what? At this point both the house and senate would be more worthwhile to this Country if you gave them all bags with a shoulder strap and a stick with a nail on the end and let them all go pick up trash on the mall! It would be at least something for the money and bennies these idiots suck out of our Country!
Move it all back to the states and communities. The federal government is a "for profit" corporation.
Ryan doesn't seem to get it. Regardless of what the tax policy is, if the government spends that money it is going to have to be paid for in one way or another. If it is not paid off by taxes, it is paid off by monetizing the debt and inflating the currency.
We've been in a hole for 200 years, now more than ever...what makes anyone think they can fix it now?
Well, if we don't soon we are all going to be building pyramids for the Chinese generals and FED bankers. There is no more "just put it on the tab". They are closing down our credit line. This will then turn our fascist corporate run government into a communist one to control all the deficit junkies as they get cut off their federal meal tickets. Government is all about crowd control to protect itself and "its" priorities.
Your type of government is dictated by your wealth. We already moved down from capitalism to fascism which was evident by who got "bailed out" of the mess and our Darth Vader faceless Gestapo police with black uniforms and automatic weapons. China is moving up from communism into fascism as its wealth increases. We are parallel societies but going in different directions.
It is going to get real ugly unless we remove power from the federal government for all domestic spending and redefine "defense".
Republicans will not have anything to do with having the wealthy pay their fare share....period. That's money out of the Republicans pocket (corruption). To hell with the folks that elected them.
It's Thanksgiving. I would say that I am grateful for our freedom in the U.S. except, our freedom is being challenged right here at home.
It is being challenged by lawmakers, especially the Democrats, who think their own political prospects are more important than the American people.
How dare the Democrats vote against a balanced budget amendment ! The Dems have not had a budget in over 900 days. Let's rid D.C. of Dems who are NOT doing their JOB.
Hey, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, that's our money you are stealing !! YOU two should be the first to go.
Did you miss the 72 Congressman members of the Conservative Republican Study Committee who told the Super Committee the other day they would not vote for any tax revenue increase on the rich. HELLO
Leona will be enjoying Thanksgiving next year by eating crow. Bon apetit!
Republicans won't even acknowledge the problem they are so into the art of denial and diversion.
How dare the Democrats vote against a balanced budget amendment ! The Dems have not had a budget in over 900 days. Let's rid D.C. of Dems who are NOT doing their JOB.
When the Republicans agree to increase revenues by closing loopholes for the rich and taxing people fairly, I am quite sure it will much easier to balance the budget and the Democrats will be happy to sign off on it.
Read 'em and weep, Leona.
U.S. Representative (now Senator) Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) told The New Yorker:
Your cut and paste does not support your irrational comments but it does indicate the GOP is out of touch with its constituency. Fail.
I was watching some televized congressional hearings with the CBO, and one of the most amazing things that I got out of it was the republicans desire to let US corporations bring their money back home with a tax holiday. We have done this three times before, and in every instance it did not create jobs. The last time it happened the companies laid off 21000 American workers and gave top management enormous bonuses and stock buyback options. Who are the republicans really for?
The one who said Bush signed the law but Obama enacted it: No, presidents sign laws, Congress enacts them. TARP was strctly Bush`s baby. BBA has a low priority with the public. They do not overwhelmingly call for it. It would have taken 292 votes. It did get 25 Dems, but would have needed 27 more even with all GOP members voting in favor. You don`t pass a constituional amendment in either house unless you have two thirds voting aye. This was just another show and tell by the GOP to please the base. And after all, if it`s OK for the GOP, it`s OK for the Dems to go with their base too.