Friday, November 18, 2011

Balanced Budget Amendment Fails in House Vote

It's a drastic step, but these are drastic times, and the establishment is making no progress toward spending restraint. Whether this is the right solution or not, perhaps continued pressure toward an amendment will help official Washington get a grip on our fiscal nightmare. At Los Angeles Times:

The House of Representatives voted down a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution on Friday, failing to revive a long-held and perpetually-elusive goal for the GOP.

The vote came 16 years after an amendment failed to pass Congress by just one vote in the Senate, but the intervening years have put the amendment even farther out of reach.

In a 261-165 vote, the measure fell well short of the two-thirds of members needed to pass. The White House has said it opposes the amendment. The Senate, which is required to vote on it as part of the August debt deal, is not expected to pass it.

The bipartisan cooperation needed to round of a two-thirds vote on any fiscal measure seems something of a pipedream in today's political climate. The divided Congress has locked horns all year on the best way to reduce the deficit and revive the sluggish economy.

A so-called super committee charged reducing the deficit appears deadlock. Friday's vote indicated few signs of hope.

Republicans watched several Democrats turn away from amendment -- even those who have voted for it in the past.

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, (D-Md.), noted that when he voted for the amendment in 1995 he had some confidence that Congress could come together to vote for spending increases in an emergency as allowed.

"Regrettably over the 16 years, I've lost that confidence," Hoyer said.

The amendment was essentially identical to the one voted on in 1995. It would have required the government to balance its books within two years of ratification, but no sooner than 2017.

A three-fifths vote of each chamber would be required before Congress could add to the debt or raise taxes. The president would be required to submit a balanced budget and the restrictions could be waived in wartime.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the amendment's sponsor, said the measure would take the country off the path that's led to a $15 trillion debt and force Congress to do the right thing.

"We need the discipline that a balance budget amendment provides," Goodlatte said.
The Wall Street Journal, in an editorial from July, lays out the reasons why an amendment might not work: "GOP Balancing Act."

I'll have more on this later.

0 comments: