Although our election decided who will hold public offices, the issues that divide Americans remain unsettled. Our political battlefield is strewn with social, economic, religious and geographic landmines ready to explode. And it’s too early to know what a Trump-led Republican administration will be like. Besides, election “winners” achieve mostly temporary victories because the “losing” side returns to fight another day.
In that unfortunate climate, vital responsibilities of government often go unattended. Perhaps the best example is our decades-long and increasingly urgent need to balance federal budgets. The last time we balanced our budget for more than two consecutive years was the eleven year period from 1920 through 1930.
If both conservative and liberal voters push for it, this might be a time when we could pass a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. With that in mind, here’s my Balanced Budget Amendment idea. It would force decisions on some issues that divide us, most notably taxes, health care and defense spending – maybe even uniting conservatives and liberals in support of practical ideas. Here is the concept:
IDEAS FOR A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT
The President must propose a balanced budget to the congress at least five months before the beginning of each fiscal year.
- Congress must pass a balanced budget and send it to the President for signature at least three months prior to the beginning of each fiscal year.
- If the President vetoes a budget approved by the congress, the president and the congress must confer, agree to and sign a budget at least 30 days prior to the beginning of each fiscal year.
- Failure of a President to meet the responsibilities described above on a timely basis constitutes voluntary resignation from the office of the presidency.
- Failure of the Congress to meet its responsibilities described above on a timely basis constitutes ninety day notice of resignation from office by all members of the congress. Each state will elect new members of congress within 60 days to take office 30 days later.
- A balanced budget must include all projected expenses plus any unplanned deficit from the prior year and retirement of at least one percent of existing national debt. It must also include projection of sufficient tax revenue to fund the budget.
- An unbalanced budget with expenses exceeding revenue is permissible during a time of war or other national emergency declared by the congress and approved by the President. An unbalanced budget requires approval by sixty percent of the members of each house of congress.
- Trust Fund programs operated by the Federal Government which have their own dedicated revenue streams may accumulate surpluses and loan them to the Federal Budget at the discretion of the Congress and the President. Timely repayment of such debt is the highest priority claim on federal revenue. (Social Security is the main program of this kind.)
The specific language and content of constitutional amendments requires extreme care and scrutiny. I’ve only tried to describe principles for an amendment, not the exacting language that would be needed.
My prediction is that it will be difficult to get legislators from either political party to consider an amendment because few, if any, are willing to make the decisions required to balance budgets. Facing a deficit, legislators from both parties are generally more willing to raise the debt ceiling than to raise taxes or cut spending.
After all the partisan shouting is done, the necessary compromises usually involve increasing our debt. The burden is borne by voters and taxpayers. With this amendment, if officeholders fail, they lose their jobs to someone who is willing to actually do the work. Holding new elections to replace a failing legislature is not a radical idea. Numerous parliamentary democracies do exactly that.
This column lays out an ambitious vision for solving an urgent national problem. It’s a good first step toward more effective government because it will also force more responsible decisions on all other federal priorities.
Is it unrealistic to think that our congress, president and voters would actually do this? Maybe… But if congress is unable to balance a budget, how can they expect to find success on other contentious questions like immigration, health care, war and civil rights that sit atop their agenda?
If we can’t make such decisions, our future as a viable nation is in doubt. Let’s get started.
Bob, here is my quick opinion:
I remember supporting Senator Jesse Helms when he ran with Ronald Reagan and one of the most touted parts of the Conservatives’ platform was the demand that Congress end deficit spending. In reality ambitious politicians always leave it up to the other members to balance the budget but not on the backs of their constituents back home. At that time it was the Democrats doing the spending. Now it is the GOP’s turn.
Talk about the danger of the mounting deficit always makes for good campaign rhetoric but it has seldom ever caused a majority of Congress to do the hard work of balancing expenditures with income. The general public does not care because they have never understood why borrowing from the world’s investors changes their well being. It’s the government’s problem, so let the government decide how to deal with it. I expect the US to run up inflation and revalue the currency gradually enough to offset the size of what we owe.
The Republican tax cuts and deregulation of the financial industry can cause another economic bubble in the near future that the GOP will expect to hide the deficit for defense and borrowing in the hope that the public will be quieted.
If the public were presented with a Constitutional amendment like your idea and told that huge cuts will permanently affect our lifestyle, they would shout it down.