Proposing a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I rise in opposition to the balanced budget amendment. It was just a decade ago that President Clinton left office with not just a balanced budget but a surplus, and we got there by a one-vote margin. No Republican votes whatsoever.

And here we are today, after 8 years and two wars and two tax cuts that were paid for on the credit card and mainly benefiting the wealthy and a devastating recession that could have been prevented had financial regulators not turned a blind eye to Wall Street, and now we're debating an amendment to the Constitution that offers anything but balance.

This amendment would destroy the budget and, in the process, wipe out jobs and eviscerate Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, extended unemployment benefits, as well as education, cancer research, veterans, bridge repair, and food inspection. You name a program, and this amendment will put it at risk.

A balanced budget amendment could force Congress to cut all programs by an average of 17.3 percent by 2018. This amendment would limit the ability of the Federal Government to respond to national crises, including an economic or natural disaster. It would virtually guarantee that recessions turn into depressions.

This amendment will require a supermajority to raise the debt ceiling--a reckless requirement given how close we came to defaulting earlier this year when just a simple majority was required.

And I'm really tired of hearing Republicans say, well, if States and families must balance their budgets, so should the Federal Government. The States have to balance their operating budgets, but they can still borrow for capital projects. And families have to manage their budgets, but they can do so by incurring debt, home mortgages, student loans, car loans, and payments for medical bills. This amendment blocks the Federal Government from making investments in the same way.

And suppose in 2008, when the deficit seemed manageable, we had a balanced budget amendment. The effect on the economy would be catastrophic. If the 2012 balanced budget were balanced through spending cuts, those cuts, it is predicted by Macroeconomics Advisers----

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Macroeconomics, a nonpartisan forecasting firm, said that those cuts would throw about 15 million more people out of work, double the unemployment rate from 9 percent to about 18 percent, and cause the economy to shrink by about 17 percent instead of growing at an expected 17 percent. This amendment will only make the economy worse.

Vote ``no.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source