Does the United States Need a Balanced Budget Amendment?
As the United States’ looming deficit continues to dominate the national discourse, many are calling for a Balanced Budget Amendment to be added to the Constitution. Such an amendment would require that the United States not spend more than its expected income in a year. Most states and some countries already have written balanced-budget provisions into their constitutions. Supporters of the amendment argue that it would force the federal government to spend responsibly, and is necessary given Congress’ failed attempts to cut down the national debt, most recently with the breakdown of the deficit-reduction “super committee.” However, critics of the amendment argue that such a provision would constrain eocnomic growth, especially during recessions, when tax revenue is down and more people depend on the government for social welfare benefits. Here is the Debate Club’s take on the Balanced Budget Amendment:
The Arguments
Yes — A well-designed constitutional amendment would prevent overspending, and worse
DAVID PRIMO, Senior Scholar at George Mason University's Mercatus Center Comment
No — Don't blame the Consitution for the incompetence of politicians
SCOTT LILLY, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress Comment (1)
Yes — Spending controls would force Washington to act responsibly
ORRIN HATCH, Senior U.S. Senator from Utah Comment (4)
No — The Constitution restricts federal spending already
TAD DEHAVEN, Budget Analyst on Federal and State Budget Issues for the Cato Institute Comment
No — Political gimmick has potentially disastrous consequences for the nation
PATRICK SHARMA, Postdoctoral Fellow in the Regional Oral History Office of the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley Comment
No — Limits would sabotage the government's ability to pull the nationout of an economic downturn
STEVE WAMHOFF, Policy Analyst for ITEP and the Legislative Director of Citizens for Tax Justice Comment
