Does the U.S. Need a Balanced Budget Amendment?

Some say amending the Constitution would solve the debt crisis; critics call it a distraction

By U.S. News Staff

April 22, 2011 RSS Feed Print

With the federal budget deficit becoming the focus of Washington debate, the idea of a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution has returned. Advocates say it will force action Congress is incapable of taking itself. Critics decry it as a distraction.
Edited by Robert Schlesinger

Yes

Orrin Hatch
Senior senator from Utah and ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee

In 1997, after a fierce debate, a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution I introduced was defeated by just one vote in the United States Senate. Fourteen years later, our nation is facing a debt crisis of epic proportions Our national debt has gone from roughly $5 trillion in 1997 to over $14 trillion today...

No

Scott Lilly
Center for American Progress senior fellow and former chief of staff of the Joint Economic Committee

The craftsmanship of our forefathers at Philadelphia seems to come under attack every time modern politicians screw up. Rather than accepting responsibility for electing incompetent leaders, it is easier to blame the Constitution. If we could only come up with a formula by which public policy could be predetermined by constitutional...

Reader Comments Read all comments (16)

Add Your Thoughts Comment Name State Email

Please enter the two words below into the text field underneath the image.

Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

The US currently borrows 40% of its needs. If we cannot borrow again we have to pay our way with taxes. That would imply a tax increase of 65% just to pay current commitments. As for paying off existing debt, that would have to be additional taxes or we could content ourselves with paying off Treasury debt as it matures, and adjusting tax rates each year to cover the projected amount as it varies. We could cut budgets, but that means police, roads, schools, defense, pensions, social security, government in general. That would be a lot of jobs that will no longer pay taxes. So everyone else will have to pay more. It would be in the Constitution, right?
A better idea. Leave the Constitution alone and elect members of Congress who will exercise good judgment and do their jobs well.

of 6:19PM July 18, 2011

The constitution included a natural restraint on government spending my making gold and silver money. Now debt is money. The only 'money' that exists is borrowed into existence. Since interest is charged on the borrowed money, more has to be borrowed to repay the original loan plus interest. This scam is the closest thing in existence to a perpetual motion machine that I am aware of. A balanced budget amendment would force the issue out in the open.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWH5TlbloU

Nayrb of UT 12:01AM May 26, 2011

Yeah balance the budget, if you don't we will soon have nobody to buy our debt. We are a nation ruled by a soft-tyranny, we can't directly see what is going on but this administration is stealing our liberties every single day.
http://www.modbargains.com/BMW-Wheels-Rims.htm

Franky Greens of AL 12:38PM May 04, 2011

Does the U.S. Need a Balanced Budget Amendment?

Some say amending the Constitution would solve the debt crisis; critics call it a distraction

Related News

Does the U.S. Need a Balanced Budget Amendment?

Reader Comments Read all comments (16)

Cartoons

Debate Club

Latest Video

Subscribe

Photos »

The White House »

Political Cartoons »

Subscribe »

Congress »