Obama, Dems slam balanced budget amendment

CBS/AP

When the House in 1995 voted on a constitutional amendment requiring the federal budget to be balanced, the measure won strong, bipartisan support. The measure died in the Senate, and the House is slated to vote on a balanced budget amendment again Friday.

This time, however, the debate is eliciting partisan sniping from both sides of the aisle, and it's unclear whether it will pass the GOP-led House.

Voicing support for the amendment on the House floor today, Republicans slammed President Obama's stewardship of the economy, noting the national debt has surpassed $15 trillion. Republican Rep. Sam Johnson of Texas said Congress must get its debt under control in order "to prevent another big, fat Greek catastrophe."

Democrats, in turn, railed against Republicans for taking up what they say is a job-destroying, poorly thought-out amendment.

Democratic Rep. Jim McDermott called the vote "another triumph of the Republican public relations office," since it gave the perception that the Republican House is busy at work, even though the amendment has no chance of making it into the Constitution. "Instead of wasting the people's time with this doomed and irresponsible amendment, we should deal with the country's serious economic concerns," he said.

The House is taking up the amendment this week because Congress agreed to consider it as part of the deal reached earlier this year to raise the debt ceiling. The amendment the House is voting on would require a three-fifths vote to allow spending to exceed revenues and would require a three-fifths vote to raise the debt ceiling.

Some conservatives are upset that the amendment does not require a three-fifths vote in Congress to raise taxes. Though Tea Party-backed Republicans wanted that requirement in the measure, House leaders kept it out with the aim of winning the support of moderate Democrats.

The conservative-Democrat Blue Dog Coalition, 25 members strong, has endorsed the amendment. However, House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer has come out forcefully against it -- even though he voted for the balanced budget amendment in 1995.

Hoyer said Tuesday that he could no longer support the amendment because, "Unfortunately, I did not contemplate the irresponsibility that I've seen fiscally over the last nine years or eight years of the Bush Administration and the Republican leadership of the House or the Senate. And this last few months of where Republicans took America to the brink of default."

The GOP's behavior in recent years, Hoyer said in a statement today, suggests Congress may not be able to get the three-fifths vote needed to approve funds to respond to a crisis -- a risk too big for Hoyer to take.

President Obama's re-election campaign is also railing against the amendment, charging that it would "require deep spending cuts that could jeopardize everything from education and Medicare to nutrition and health programs for at-risk children."

The Obama team points out that Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney also supports a balanced budget amendment. But like the Tea Party conservatives in the House, Romney has backed the version that would require a super-majority to raise taxes. Without that requirement, Congress could just as easily raise taxes to balance the budget as they could make spending cuts.

Even if the House manages to get the two-thirds support necessary to pass the amendment, it would still have to pass by a two-thirds vote in the Senate and would have to be ratified by at least 38 states -- an unlikely prospect.

[gep1955]

Of course any plan that would hold our Marxist president and the communist democrat party accountable for their out of control spending is going to be slammed.

[sandy 1027]

After seeing the way that Congress has operated , of late( even now, with the Super Committee being at a stalemate only 5 days from its deadline),I think that Steny Hoyer's point is well taken.Our bond rating was downgraded in large part, due to partisan wrangling over the debt ceiling, and the inability of both sides to compromise to reach an agreement.If every major issue is going to be approached this way, and Congress has locked itself into a system that requires a 3/5ths majority vote , it will only create more of a toxic environment,dysfunction; and possible meltdown of our government because one side refuses to raise revenue, when necessary; and the other refuses to make cuts that are needed.

[dantom39]

Balanced budget something working people in the real world live with. Arrogant washington can/t

[RobAla]

You are right. Every household and every business that makes it operates on a budget, and for the last two years the jerks in Washington haven't even had the responsibility to pass a budget for the nation. The Republican led House passed one, but the Democrat Senate shot it down. We are $15 trillion in the hole, and over the next 10 years we are projected to run up another $9 trillion in national debt. These arrogant jerks in Washington seem to want no restraints, so they can spend until we collapse fiscally. Anyone who doesn't see the need for a Balanced Budget Amendment is blind. Anyone understanding the seriousness of our situation and is against a Balanced Budget Amendment is corrupt and irresponsible.

[rogerr9]

Had we only known the damage Bush would do, I am sure that the balanced budget would have passed in 1995 to prevent the enormous damage that followed.

[joedreamer1]

Hopefully this gets to arthanyel. I to am truly concerned what happens in this country. I am a 72 year old service connected veteran. This technology is new to me. I just recently retired my carrier pigeons. (joke). At one point I was homeless. Now I live on social security and a VA disability grant. There are many things wrong in our country. "Gaming the system" seems to be a way of life by just about all of us. How do we get this right??

[thomasf0]

means tests for all government programs will help alot..

[RobAla]

Basically, they are slamming responsible federal spending. These goofballs are part of the problem.

Regarding the super committee: Even if they come to a deal to reduce the spending by $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years, it is only a small effort. We are projected to add another $9 trillion over the next 10 years to an already outrageous $15 trillion national debt. If they were really serious, they would be finding $9 trillion in federal spending reductions - so that we don't go further in the hole than we already are.

We may need to clean house in Washington in order to find responsible adults will to make the tough decisions. Each American has his/her wish list for the federal government to do - but we can't afford to pretend that it is Christmas anymore. The United States is in serious fiscal trouble, and the leaders of the nation fiddle as Rome burns. We have a nation of citizens with our heads in the sand, and we have elected irresponsible dreamers instead of practical and responsible adults.

The 2012 election is going to seriously be a watershed event. We will continue to elect irresponsible dreamers and watch the nation collapse under the weight of excessive federal spending, or we will elect leaders who will take a stand to save this nation. Which will it be?

[arthanyel]

Although I rarely agree with you, RobAla, THIS post is completely coherent, factually accurate, and I couldn't agree more. We may differ on what the priorities should be for those responsible adults, but we are in complete agreement that we need some.

[arthanyel]

With the caveat it doesn't have to be $9T in spending reductions, a combination of spending cuts (absolutely needed) and revenue increases (absolutely needed) to equal $9T is the recipe for success.

[franknkissy]

In a nuclear family - it does not matter who makes the debt 1 The creditors end hounding both wife and husband - as we may expect the world to come after both democrat & republican one day soon !Ruining the nation's credit-standing throughout the earth ! Replacing the dollar with the more credit-worthy yuan ! And ending the financial pre-eminence of America ! As a single family loses face and the ability to purchase or protect itself - so shall the U.S.A. !! So a Balanced Budget seems to be alright ! If gradually phased in ! ......Frank - Paz con Justicia !

[focusonjobs1]

This is nothing more than a Republican attempt shrink government (code for cut taxes on the wealthy). They have tried every back door means of keeping all their ill gotten gains. Why don't they stop the charade and just come out and say they want to take society back to medieval times where there was a very distinct difference between nobles and the peasants. Let me be clear....the laws are written so the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.....taxes and social programs are the only thing preventing an epidemic of beggars.

[joedreamer1]

I do not usually respond to commenting on things. I wonder how many hours and days we Americans spend commenting, etc. I read each of the 41 comments. Would that time and energy be well spent volunteering for things that affect our human family here in the U.S. and elsewhere. Would some one hazard a guess about the time expended in this pursuit.

Thank you.

[arthanyel]

jpe: The answer is too much, and for those of us that are not paid conservatve trolls, I can only say that most of us are just concerbned citizens using this as one of many venues to try and influence public opinion and work for change.

I spend about 10% of my political time blogging and commenting :-)

[wfw3536]

Our country is slowly sinking into debt and Obama and the Dems just do not get it. In 3 years we have borrowed over 4 trillion dollars. Soon our country will look like some of the European countries who lived on borrowed money. I just feel sorry for our children who someday will have to bit the bullet and start living within their means.

[arthanyel]

Conservative propoaganda. The deficit handed to Obama by Bush was almost $1.2T. Democrats haven't added any spending, especially since under Democratic control of the House they were required to pay for any new spending with rvenues or spending cuts elsewhere.

Republicans have created 13T of the 15T debt, and THEY are the ones who claim they are fiscally responsible?