Balanced Budget Amendment

Floor Speech

Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, the need for a balanced budget amendment is very great. You know how the national debt now is reaching a point where, if we don't intervene with a constitutional requirement for a balanced budget, it is going to become unsustainable. Statutes have not controlled deficit spending.
I was an author of one of those statutes--former Senator Harry F. Byrd of Virginia and I as a Member of the House--back in 1979. For 15 years that law was on the books, and never in those 15 years was there a balanced budget amendment. It makes it very clear that laws will not control deficit spending.

I concluded a long time ago, as I voted on previous constitutional amendments requiring a balanced budget that didn't pass, that a constitutional amendment is a must to provide Congress with the necessary discipline. The example right now in Europe of their fiscal and deficit situation is sobering. Nations that allow debt to grow out of control risk default. One of those countries is practically in default. If we don't take effective corrective action, the European future could be ours and sooner than we think.

Each generation of Americans has enjoyed a brighter future than the previous generation.

The failure of Congress to tame the deficit and the debt threatens the American dream for our children and grandchildren. The Constitution was designed to secure the blessings of liberty not only for ourselves but also for our children. This makes balancing the budget not just an economic issue but a moral issue as well, and creates a moral obligation to take action. A constitutional amendment is not only a first step in that direction but it will make sure the discipline is binding in future years.

The balanced budget amendment will enforce a lower debt. Members taking an oath to adhere to its provisions guarantees greater fiscal discipline than what we have without that constitutional provision. They will take that oath seriously, just as is the case for the 46 State constitutions that contain requirements their State legislatures balance their budgets. We always say the State legislatures and States are the political laboratories for our system of government. We ought to take the results of those laboratories and put them to use at the Federal level. I am urging my colleagues to vote for the resolution before us, which is S.J. Res. 10.

There have been complaints this resolution would transfer to the courts the power of the purse, but that is a misreading of S.J. Res. 10. The amendment prohibits the courts from raising taxes. The doctrine of standing, the doctrine of ripeness, and the doctrine of political question will prevent courts from deciding cases under the amendment.

This is a lesson we should have learned. I think it was 1997--nearly 15 years ago--when this body failed by one vote--and I am ashamed to tell you it was one Republican not voting for it--to enact such a constitutional requirement. But it didn't pass. If it had passed, we wouldn't be in the fiscal situation we are in right now. I urge my colleagues to vote for S.J. Res. 10.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source