Boehner Won't Rule Out 'Balanced Budget Amendment' That Permits Unlimited Spending

[ScreamingEagle]

Is compromising before you even negotiate the way Boehner plans to "negotiate".....?

what does babbling Boehner actually MEAN when he says he needs to "listen to members about which version".....and that "there is no decision yet"......?

we ALREADY had a vote in the House that passed the Cut, Cap, and Balance.....which LIMITED SPENDING to a percentage of GDP....

why is bumbling Boehner already WAFFLING on this very clear mandate....?

Boehner Won't Rule Out 'Balanced Budget Amendment' That Permits Unlimited Federal Spending | CNSnews.com

 

[jillian]

because it has nothing to do with controlling spending...

all it has to do with is keep the president from a second term. if they were to win this time around, you can't possibly think they'd conduct themselves any less irresponsibly than they did when shrub was president.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

because it has nothing to do with controlling spending...

all it has to do with is keep the president from a second term. if they were to win this time around, you can't possibly think they'd conduct themselves any less irresponsibly than they did when shrub was president.

...so you admit that the Dems and Obama's spending is also irresponsible......?

 

[waltky]

Ed Meese on a balanced budget...

Balanced Budget Amendment Will Backfire Unless It Curbs Spending, Taxes, Courts
October 31, 2011 - Edwin Meese, who served as attorney general under President Ronald Reagan, told CNSNews.com on Friday that adding a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution will backfire unless the amendment caps federal spending, requires supermajorities in Congress to raise taxes and restricts the ability of judges to preempt the elected branches in determining federal taxing and spending laws.

“A weak Balanced Budget Amendment--without certain safeguards and protections against excessive taxation and excessive spending--would be worse than the situation we have at the present time,” Meese said in a videotaped interview at the Heritage Foundation. “It would be used by those who seek to have an expanded government and increased taxes to make it mandatory to increase taxes,” said Meese. “It would make it much easier to raise taxes, and that’s why the important thing is to have a protection, for example, that it would take two-thirds of both houses in order to increase taxes … and, likewise, that there be some sort of a cap on expenditures, perhaps in relation to Gross Domestic Product.

“It’s also very important,” said Meese, “that the balanced budget amendment provide that the courts would not be empowered to enforce the provisions of the balanced budget amendment because that would turn over to the courts the ability for them to raise taxes perhaps or to exercise powers that the Constitution gives to the elected branches of the government, and that is adopting the spending plan for the federal government.” The legislation to increase the federal debt limit that House Speaker John Boehner negotiated with President Barack Obama in August directs that both houses of Congress will vote on a balanced budget amendment before the end of this year. But the law does not specify what type of balanced budget amendment the House and Senate will take up for a vote.

When CNSNews.com asked Boehner last week if the Republican leadership had ruled out voting on a balanced budget amendment that did not cap federal spending as a percentage of GDP or require supermajorities in both houses to raise taxes, Boehner said the leadership had not decided what type of balanced budget amendment it would bring to a vote. “There are at least half a dozen different versions of a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution," Boehner told CNSnews.com at his Thursday press briefing. "Many of us believe that a balanced budget amendment is the ultimate enforcement mechanism to control spending here in Washington. “As we approach this vote, the [majority] leader and I are going to listen to our members about which version they would want us to vote on, and we’ve got no decision yet, but we’re going to work with our members to make that decision,” Boehner said.

MORE

 

[francoHFW]

MORE useless BS for the Dupes....

 

[Avatar4321]

Ive got no problem with unlimited spending if they find a source of unlimited money that doesnt involve fleecing the tax payers or simply printing/monatizing money.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Spending is controlled by elections, not useless amendments – that voters fail to appropriately use the former is not justification for the latter.

all it has to do with is keep the president from a second term.

Correct.

 

[uscitizen]

because it has nothing to do with controlling spending...

all it has to do with is keep the president from a second term. if they were to win this time around, you can't possibly think they'd conduct themselves any less irresponsibly than they did when shrub was president.

...so you admit that the Dems and Obama's spending is also irresponsible......?

I do as in ALSO.

the republicans are have proven over several decades that they are just as good at overspending as the dems are. Statistically they may well be worse than the dems.

The difference is the hypocircisy level since the dems never really claimed to be fiscally conservative.

 

[Vaard]

any balanced budget amendment is going to have a clause that congress can overide the amendment by a certain number of votes and they will always come up with a reason to do it......

if they need an amendment to tell them to stop spending then the amendment becomes moot anyway........