Balanced Budget Amendment Would Have Prevented Current Mess

Spending controls would force Washington to act responsibly

Reader Comments
Back to argument

Congress already uses many budget gimmicks to make the budget deficit look smaller than it actually is. I believe they would just get more creative if they had a balanced budget amendment requirement. The governor of Virginia shorted the state retirement system by $400 million last year so that he could "balance" the budget as required by the state constitution. So in Virginia, the requirement for a balanced budget did not really result in one. Why would anybody think that it would work when we have over 500 Congressmen and Senators trying to game the system? Do you really want to see broken down infrastructure, such as highways, bridges and dams? Pass a balanced budget amendment and see how long before we have a rash of people killed in bridge or dam failures.

John of VA 8:38PM January 15, 2012

Hey Senator, I hate to tell you the stimulus package did work to a point. If the stimulus package did not happen you would have seen companys closing there doors left and right due to the major banks closing down and no money being lent for operation cost of large companies in the U.S., there would have been a domino effect starting with the large all the way down to small businesses. Also I do not understand why Congress needs an amendment to the Constitution to tell you to do your job? You need something written on a piece pf paper telling you to due your job? If thats the case it's time to retire! And retire without the Pension the people have been paying for. You did not or could not do your job cause it was not written on a piece of paper, so there is no reason the people have to pay you 80% of your pay when you retire cause you did not do your job. If you where in the private sector you would have been fired if you went to your boss and told him to write down the duties of your job inorder for you to do any work. Now why should Americans pay you a pension of $139,600.00 plus cause you could not or would not do your job? Your boses are finally speaking up now, If you can't and or will not do your job your fired and you can only collect approx. $20,000.00 a year from Social Security plus what ever other pension plan you paid into out of your pocket. We the people will not pay you a pension of $139,000.00 plus cause you allong with the rest of your cronies cleaned out Social Security so we had to steal the money from your pension inorder to keep the Government going. Now you know how we the people feel about you and your cronies stealing our money from Social Security. PS. there is only so much left cause Congress has been cutting it so much, you'll only be receiving approx. $10,000.00 a year instead of the $ 20,000.00 a year you should have gotten from Social Security. SORRY

Thomas of OH 8:36AM December 07, 2011

Well, Senator, does your analysis include yourself? Are you saying that the quality of thought and action achieved by our elected representatives needs to be policed? Could there perhaps be a better alternative? For instance, how about if we changed laws to prohibit career politicians who enrich themselves at teh public trough for decades and jimmy the campaign laws to almost guarantee their own re-election? You have been as guilty of this as anyone (I've had my eye on you for a long time!) Deliver pork barrel to your biggest contributors and they pay you back with campaign contributions and then speaking engagements and board positions when you retire. You get maybe $1 million, they get billions, and the average American gets screwed! Sorry to tell you this Orrin, but you're a Grade A bunghole!

Thomas Crickenberger of CA 11:13PM December 05, 2011

The budget for any institution is always the limit to ones ability in running an organization. When there is wind fall of extra funds you want to spend them so the next guy won't. But when your short for projects or emergency projects there is always the choking hard choices of where do we get the money. Vigorous debate ensues over what you can live without or what the tax payees can do without in this case. It all comes doun to who has the loudest voice. I would think our children, our families would be the main concern here. Being in debt is another atack on the families of America. We need a balanced budget or at least a path that leads to freedom. So as not to be delivered into the hands of our enemies.

Fred Daynes of WA 10:15AM November 28, 2011