I disagree on the balanced budget amendment idea. It's one thing for Congress and the President to get together on a bad law, like the one Obama signed yesterday. It would be much, much worse for them to get together on a bad constitutional amendment. To those who say that it would not necessarily be a bad amendment, I say, Hello? Have you been paying attention? There is no way on God's green earth that they would get it right, but they could easily waste about a decade fighting about it.

And how are the mechanics of the amendment supposed to work? Is there supposed to be some objective benchmark that says when the budget is balanced? I don't see it happening.

All those difficulties aside, I just don't think the Constitution is the place for specific economic policies. The Constitution provides the framework. Congress is supposed to provide the policy. James Madison and his friends did a nice job. I would prefer that Eric Cantor, Mike Pence, Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, et al., keep their hands off of it.

Got to go with Honus on this one.

I'm opposed to a balanced-budget amendment.

I'm opposed to term-limits.

It's the job of the electorate to make choices. I want a better electorate.

Now here's what I am in favor of -->

If you need the gov't to play the role of your parents and take care of you. Fine. Your stating you cannot fulfill your responsibilities as an adult. Voting and possibly other rights of adulthood are suspended.

I'm completely serious. I hear the constant braying of those demanding their rights. It's a two-edged sword; rights & responsibilities. Fulfill your responsibilities and assume tights.

How long before words like neanderthal, reactionary, and jack-boot show up from those that differ. Ahh! The joy and burden of intellectual clarity.

There are differing philosophies regarding debt. And one camp, that VP Cheney belongs to, says deficits don't matter. Well, do they or don't they? If they do then I want a mechanism in place to be sure power doesn't get abused, since the current crop of pols don't appear to put the interests of the country first anymore.

__________________
1985 380SE Blue/Blue - 230,000 miles
2012 Subaru Forester 5-speed
2005 Toyota Sienna
2004 Chrysler Sebring convertible
1999 Toyota Tacoma

When they are in controll the deficit doesn't matter--They can start a war to distract attention away from them fleecing the rest of us.

A balanced budget is not an economic policy. It is a directed act of government -- like guarding boarders or regulating trade.

The people you listed would continue to have as much impact on the Constitution as before.

The amendment process is the ultimate act of constitutionality. Nothing is more constitutional.

He'd have to get Georg Soros' permission.

Writing a budget is the ultimate act of public policy making. The budget is a statement of priorities. We will spend less on some things and more on others based on their relative importance. That's policy making. In addition to setting priorities, policy makers in tough economic times might decide to run a deficit. In good times, it might be the government's policy to have a budget that is unbalanced to the surplus side. That sort of decision will change with the times and is not the sort of thing that is traditionally set forth in the Constitution.

The balanced budget amendment that Rand Paul and his friends scribbled on the back of an envelope and demanded be included in the budget deal is a fricking mess. Here it is: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hjres1ih/pdf/BILLS-112hjres1ih.pdf

It says, among other things: "...Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed one-fifth the economic output of the United States, unless two-thirds of each House of Congress shall provide for a specific increase in outlays above this amount..."

Can you imagine the games that future administrations would play trying to squeeze the "total outlays" into that definition? It would be an annual debacle. This is policy making, no way around it. It has no business in the Constitution.True.

The devil is always in the details. A balanced budget amendment would follow that rule.
They would have to agree on what triggers it.
Then the resolution--cut spending across the board, or with Congress selecting the cuts, or balance by raising taxes? Many here would love that! Overspend, and then have automatic ( I didn't vote to raise taxes!!) tax increases on the undeserving rich--the best of all possible worlds.

As messy as is our present system, I think I prefer it.

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags

Each portion of the constitution has games played about it. Here's a hint: Every year the Supreme Court goes into session because laws conflict with the constitution. The reality is already what you fear.

The Congress and president have clearly demonstrated their inability to control their appetites over the previous 50 years. There is no indication that the congress or president have suddenly got religion. In a few months they will go back to log rolling and earmarking. It will be an election year and the cycle of increasing indebtedness will resume.

If congress cannot control itself, who will control congress?

ayn rand?

__________________
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

The people, or the states, their is a clause in their...the 2nd amendment gives in teeth.

__________________
2006 CL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2026 Genesis GV70
2007 Tiara 3200

glenn beck is here.

__________________
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

The voters control congress and always have. The voters have no one to blame but themselves, or other voters.

The liberal media is to blame for this mess...they got Obama elected by giving him a free pass on all the stuff he pulled before the election, and attacking everyone who opposed him to the point of both slander and libel ....and kept enough people in the dark they foolishly elected him.....and they still run interference on his behalf by keeping people in the dark about his antics....

But in all fairness.....he isn't alone in this....but being President....the buck stops with him. After all.....the same people giving him a pass were real quick to blame Bush for everything...even when they had to make it up.....everyone hasn't forgotten about RatherGate yet have we?

__________________
Proud owner of ....
1971 280SE W108
1979 300SD W116
1983 300D W123
1975 Ironhead Sportster chopper
1987 GMC 3/4 ton 4X4 Diesel
1989 Honda Civic (Heavily modified)
---------------------
Section 609 MVAC Certified
---------------------
"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche

After the disasterous Bush presidency, the voters -other than Republican bimbos and fascist coprophages- would have chose any Democrat running for president.