Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
...how would we have funded the Afghan and Iraq wars?
-- Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)The Library of Congress > THOMAS Home > Bills, Resolutions > Search Results
Bill Text
112th Congress (2011-2012)
H.J.RES.2.IH
H.J.RES.2 -- Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States. (Introduced in House - IH)
HJ 2 IH
112th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. J. RES. 2
Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 5, 2011
Mr. GOODLATTE (for himself, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. AKIN, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mrs. BIGGERT, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, Mr. BONNER, Mr. BOREN, Mr. BOUSTANY, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. BROOKS, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. BUCHANAN, Mr. BURGESS, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. CARTER, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. COBLE, Mr. COLE, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. CRAWFORD, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, Mr. DENT, Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. FLORES, Mr. FORBES, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. GARDNER, Mr. GARRETT, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. GRIFFITH of Virginia, Mr. HALL, Mr. HARPER, Mr. HELLER, Mr. HERGER, Mr. HULTGREN, Mr. HURT, Mr. ISSA, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. JONES, Mr. JORDAN, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LANCE, Mr. LATTA, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. LUCAS, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. MACK, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. MARINO, Mr. MATHESON, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. MCKINLEY, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mrs. MYRICK, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. NUGENT, Mr. OLSON, Mr. PENCE, Mr. PETERSON, Mr. PLATTS, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. POSEY, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, Mr. REED, Mr. REHBERG, Mr. REICHERT, Mr. RIBBLE, Mr. RIGELL, Mrs. ROBY, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. ROSKAM, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. ROSS of Florida, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. SCHILLING, Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. SMITH of Nebraska, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. TURNER, Mr. UPTON, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. WITTMAN, Mr. WOLF, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. MEEHAN, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. FARENTHOLD, Mr. GRAVES of Missouri, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. LEWIS of California, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. POMPEO, Mr. SCHOCK, Ms. GRANGER, Mr. WALDEN, Mr. CUELLAR, Mr. BARTLETT, and Mr. CHABOT) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
`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.
`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.
`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.
`Section 4. No bill to increase revenue shall become law unless approved by a majority of the whole number of each House by a rollcall vote.
`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.
`Section 6. The Congress shall enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays and receipts.
`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.
`Section 8. 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, 2016.'.
You mean the wars that the CBO approximate cost under 1 trill from conception to 2008?Does not apply to war or national emergency.
Plus a super-majority can utilize discretionary overrule.
So it's pretty much a deal where we exempt the pro-war crowd from fiscal responsibility?
lol
Given that unpaid for wars are the primary cause of our massive debt, what's the point of balanced budget amendment that exempts defense?
No, he could not. This is one of the reasons that a balanced budget amendment would be a good thing. Less irresponsible legislation for pats on the back.Question 2 (or 3 or whatever)
Could Bush gotten either of his tax cuts through if a balanced budget amendment were in place??
People seem to overlook the fact that a mandatory balanced budget leaves all kinds of room for tax increases to obtain a balance, rather than spending reductions.
The balanced budget amendment gets most of its support from the right, even though it gives congress much more ability to implement tax increases. That's strange.
Let's be real. What is the most likely move in congress when seeking the balance? Cut spending which they're all deathly afraid of doing, or increase and create new taxes which they seem to not even think twice about?
It's a stupid idea.
People seem to overlook the fact that a mandatory balanced budget leaves all kinds of room for tax increases to obtain a balance, rather than spending reductions.
The balanced budget amendment gets most of its support from the right, even though it gives congress much more ability to implement tax increases. That's strange.
Let's be real. What is the most likely move in congress when seeking the balance? Cut spending which they're all deathly afraid of doing, or increase and create new taxes which they seem to not even think twice about?
It's a stupid idea.
They have that exact same power now. The key difference is that hiding the expenditure will be far more difficult because the average person will see immediately the costs of future programs through their raised taxes. It is a great idea because congress will be held accountable immediately instead of the snoozing public waking up after the fact. You know, after anything can be done about it.
Many in Congress think a balance budget amendment would be a panacea for deficit problems. I say they have not considered what it would really mean. If for example in 2010 we had a balanced budget amendment, all discretionary spending, education, Homeland Security, agriculture, Health and Human Services, Justice, a large portion of the defense budget, and thousands pet projects of legislators would have to be eliminated and along with it over a million jobs. The chance of Congress doing this would be zero. Taxes increases would be the only alternative.People seem to overlook the fact that a mandatory balanced budget leaves all kinds of room for tax increases to obtain a balance, rather than spending reductions.
The balanced budget amendment gets most of its support from the right, even though it gives congress much more ability to implement tax increases. That's strange.
Let's be real. What is the most likely move in congress when seeking the balance? Cut spending which they're all deathly afraid of doing, or increase and create new taxes which they seem to not even think twice about?
It's a stupid idea.
They have that exact same power now. The key difference is that hiding the expenditure will be far more difficult because the average person will see immediately the costs of future programs through their raised taxes. It is a great idea because congress will be held accountable immediately instead of the snoozing public waking up after the fact. You know, after anything can be done about it.
...how would we have funded the Afghan and Iraq wars?
...how would we have funded the Afghan and Iraq wars?
This is why, Despite being for Fiscal Conservatism, I do not think a Balanced Budget Amendment is wise. Not smart to Tie the Governments hands. There will always be times when Deficit spending is unavoidable. Our Current problem is for the last 25 Plus years we have been doing it, with out any real period of Surplus in between. That is unsustainable.
Deficit spending is suppose to be something you do in an Emergency, not the status Quo for 25 plus years, and before you say anything, yes I know it's Both sides Fault.
Reagan and the two Bushes created 93% of the National Debt by lowering taxes for the rich.
Click on the link....
ReaganBushDebt.org
According to Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999, the debt at the end of the 1980 fiscal year, on September 30th, 1980, was $907,701,000,000. On September 30th, 1981, it was $997,855,000,000. Averaging it out over the year gives a debt of $246,997,260.27 per day.
Reagan took office 112 days later on January 20th, 1981. The debt on that date could be estimated as $907,701,000,000 plus 112 x $246,997,260.27, or $935,364,693,151.
Bill Clinton was the first president to slow the rate of the accrual of debt after the current out-of-control spending began with the Borrow and Spend Republicans in 1981.
The final amount of the senior Bush debt was $4,174,218,594,232.91 (according to Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)), and Clinton became president on January 20th, 1993. Bill Clinton saw $1,553,558,144,071.73 added to the national debt during the eight years of his presidency.
However, from the start of fiscal year 1994 (7 months after Clinton became president), until the start of fiscal year 2002 (7 months after Bush took office), the amount of money paid toward interest on the existing Federal debt was $2,767,282,794,374.59 (Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding).
Therefore, no amount of the national debt is attributable to Bill Clinton - his policies of higher taxes and reduced spending actually simultaneously reduced the debt and brought about the strongest economy since World War II, despite the fiscal disaster left in the wake of Reagan and the first Bush.
The debt was at $5,727,776,738,304.64 on January 19th, 2001, the last business day before George W. Bush took the office of president. The debt was at $10,628,881,485,510.23 on January 16th, 2009, the last business day before Barack H. Obama became president.
During his administration, George W. Bush
increased the national debt by $4,901,104,747,205.59
and personally approved of the creation of 46% of the entire national debt,
in only 8 years.
ReaganBushDebt.org Calculation Details
According to Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999, the debt at the end of the 1980 fiscal year, on September 30th, 1980, was $907,701,000,000. On September 30th, 1981, it was $997,855,000,000. Averaging it out over the year gives a debt of $246,997,260.27 per day.
Reagan took office 112 days later on January 20th, 1981. The debt on that date could be estimated as $907,701,000,000 plus 112 x $246,997,260.27, or $935,364,693,151.
Bill Clinton was the first president to slow the rate of the accrual of debt after the current out-of-control spending began with the Borrow and Spend Republicans in 1981.
The final amount of the senior Bush debt was $4,174,218,594,232.91 (according to Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)), and Clinton became president on January 20th, 1993. Bill Clinton saw $1,553,558,144,071.73 added to the national debt during the eight years of his presidency.
However, from the start of fiscal year 1994 (7 months after Clinton became president), until the start of fiscal year 2002 (7 months after Bush took office), the amount of money paid toward interest on the existing Federal debt was $2,767,282,794,374.59 (Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding).
Therefore, no amount of the national debt is attributable to Bill Clinton - his policies of higher taxes and reduced spending actually simultaneously reduced the debt and brought about the strongest economy since World War II, despite the fiscal disaster left in the wake of Reagan and the first Bush.
The debt was at $5,727,776,738,304.64 on January 19th, 2001, the last business day before George W. Bush took the office of president. The debt was at $10,628,881,485,510.23 on January 16th, 2009, the last business day before Barack H. Obama became president.
During his administration, George W. Bush
increased the national debt by $4,901,104,747,205.59
and personally approved of the creation of 46% of the entire national debt,
in only 8 years.
ReaganBushDebt.org Calculation Details
Obama has already added $4 trillion to the debt.
End of story.
