Every American business owner knows three fundamental facts: they must have a budget and be able to live within that budget, they can’t spend money that they don’t have, and they can’t promise more to their employees than they can provide.
Unfortunately, the federal government has never learned those three basic things. This year Congress isn’t even going to trouble themselves with passing a Budget Resolution. It seems that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in the House don’t want the American people to know how bad our financial situation really is. It’s amazing to me that even though the House is required, by their rules, to adopt a Budget Resolution by April 15, they can just ignore it if they choose.
Congress and the Obama Administration continue to come up with spending plans and proposals that we simply have no way of paying for. With a deficit of almost $13 trillion dollars, and several programs such as social security and medicare already on shaky ground, it is time to act.
We simply must find a way to reduce the deficit and to get back to responsible spending practices. Future generations are depending on us to take action. None of us want to burden our children and grandchildren with a debt that can’t be paid. And the experts are all telling us that we are on an economic course that can’t be sustained.
It seems pretty clear to me that the only way to make irresponsible Washington politicians become responsible is to pass a law that will force them to balance the federal budget every fiscal year. That is why I will support and work to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment.
Cross Posted at Tom Ganley.com
Victoria Coates
Daniel Horowitz
A slight mutation...
acat (Diary) Friday, May 14th at 2:37PM EST (link)I would be happy to see a balanced budget.
I would be happier to see a “balanced economy”.
What I mean is, an amendment that restricts the Fed to spending no more than, say, 10% of GDP of the prior year.
That, more than a “balanced budget” (which is subject to abuse by way of “we expect income to be X” or “we borrowed from future taxes” funny accounting) is hard to get around, and has the same net effect. A balanced budget could be quite similar to what’s going on with Obamacare – fudge the numbers lower, fudge the taxes to start years before the benefits, etc. etc.
A percentage-of-GDP restriction is a little more effective at controlling the size of government. Taxes paid in 2010 are on money earned in 2009, and the GDP for 2009 is known by April 15, so by limiting government to spending 10% of 2009 GDP in 2010 should line up nicely to revenues received.
Both make it impossible to run deficits or debt, but the GDP-percentage approach automatically adjusts for up-and-down years.
Mew
——

Caveat Suffragator