If there is any single issue which smokes out and identifies progressive thinking low life politicians, balancing the federal budget on an annual basis would surely be among the top ten picks. So, let us take a look at the most recent proposal to balance the annual budget to see if it is really designed to force an annually balanced federal budget.
Sen DeMint, [SC] introduced the following proposal on 2/4/2010 which has 16 co-sponsors:
Sen Burr, Richard [NC]
Sen Chambliss, Saxby [GA]
Sen Coburn, Tom [OK]
Sen Cornyn, John [TX]
Sen Crapo, Mike [ID]
Sen Ensign, John [NV]
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Graham, Lindsey [SC]
Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK]
Sen Isakson, Johnny [GA]
Sen Kyl, Jon [AZ]
Sen LeMieux, George S. [FL]
Sen McCain, John [AZ]
Sen Risch, James E. [ID]
Sen Sessions, Jeff [AL]
Sen Vitter, David [LA]
S.J.RES.27 -- Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States
(editorial comments are in bold)
`Article--
`Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a rollcall vote.
NOTE: Under Section 1, the amendment immediately states how it may be overruled by a three-fifths vote.
`Section 2. The limit on the debt of the United States held by the public shall not be increased, unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House shall provide by law for such an increase by a rollcall vote.
NOTE: Under Section 2, the very intentions for the amendment [putting an end to increasing the national debt] can be subverted by allowing Congress to increase the national debt without providing specific taxes equaling the increase in the national debt.
`Section 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which total outlays do not exceed total receipts.
NOTE: Section 3 is absolutely meaningless and an illusion to portray fiscal responsibility. Have we not just learned with the recent health care proposal debate how projected figures can be manipulated by our Executive to portray legislation in which outlays and receipts are in balance when they are not?
`Section 4. A bill to increase the internal revenue shall require for final adoption in each House the concurrence of two-thirds of the whole number of that House by rollcall vote.
NOTE: While Section 4 discourages taxes to be increased by requiring a two-thirds vote in each House, the amendment encourages Congress to simply increase the national debt by a three fifths vote in both Houses.
`Section 5. The Congress may waive the provisions of this article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war is in effect. The provisions of this article may be waived for any fiscal year in which the United States is engaged in military conflict which causes an imminent and serious military threat to national security and is so declared by a joint resolution, adopted by a majority of the whole number of each House, which becomes law.
NOTE: The flimflamery under Section 5 is most remarkable. In addition to setting the amendment aside as stated in Section 1, a simple majority vote in each House may ignore the requirement to balance the budget by simply declaring an existing military conflict has caused an “imminent and serious military threat to national security“. Have we not just seen how this “crisis” scare tactic mentality has been used to plunder our federal treasury under TARP; how it has been used to bail out auto companies which have blood sucking unions, and used to increase the national debt beyond human comprehension?
`Section 6. The Congress shall enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts.
NOTE: And here, under Section 6, we find the proposal‘s crown jewel! It is proposed to be etched in stone [our Constitution] that the entire balanced budget act heretofore is to be based upon “estimates”. How sweet of the amendment’s supporters to be so confident in, e.g., the Office and Budget Management, which has just opened the door to Obamacare with its fuzzy math ‘estimates” which are now known, beyond the shadow of doubt, to be nothing more than mathematical alchemy to allow additional unsustainable spending and borrowing.
`Section 7. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except for those for repayment of debt principal.
NOTE: And what happens when total receipts derived from borrowing far exceed those for repayment of debt principal?
`Section 8. The provisions of this article respecting the internal revenue shall take effect upon the date of ratification of this article. The remaining provisions of this article shall take effect beginning with the later of the second fiscal year beginning after its ratification or the first fiscal year beginning after December 31, 2015.'.
_________
Bottom line is, Senator DeMint and his 16 co-sponsors are perpetrating a fraud which is titled “a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States“. The truth is, the proposal neither compels an annual balanced budget, nor requires equal taxes to finance increases in the national debt.
And just for the record, let it be known that our existing Constitution already provides a specific method [an apportioned tax among the States] to deal with annual deficits should Congress borrow to meet its expenditures. But our progressive thinking RINOs, and the fans of an ever expanding and bloated federal government, fear the wisdom of our founding father’s instructions for dealing with deficits. Our founder’s instructions, if followed, would bring to a grinding halt the plundering of our national treasury, end Congress’s irresponsible spending and borrowing, and above all, would make every member of Congress immediately accountable to their State’s Governor and Legislature should Congress engage in irresponsible deficit spending, in which case, each state’s Congressional Delegation would have to return home with a bill for their State to pay to extinguish any deficit Congress created during the year by Congress. And, each State’s share of the bill is pre determined by our Constitution’s fair share formula:
State's population
---------------------------- X DEFICIT = STATE’S SHARE
Total U.S. Population
As you can see, there are no gimmicks under our founder’s no nonsense remedy. It’s pay to play all the way! For a summary of our Founder’s original tax plan see: CLICK HERE. And for historical documentation of the apportioned tax CLICK HERE.
JWK
“…a national revenue must be obtained; but the system must be such a one, that, while it secures the object of revenue it shall not be oppressive to our constituents.”___ Madison, during the creation of our Nation’s first revenue raising Act
