McConnell on BB Amendment: Amend the Constitution, Elections haven't worked

[Jack Fate]

You support bankrupting the USA. Got it.

Incorrect.

When do we stop adding on to our debt and start paying it down?

 

[hortysir]

The original article from ThinkProgress that includes the video and link to the article below:

Mitch McConnell: We Must Rewrite The Constitution Because ‘Elections’ Haven’t ‘Worked’ | ThinkProgress


YouTube - ‪McConnell Hates Democracy‬‏

Text of the video:

The time has come for a balanced budget amendment that forces Washington to balance its books. If these debt negotiations have convinced us of anything, it’s that we can’t leave it to politicians in Washington to make the difficult decisions that they need to get our fiscal house in order. The balanced budget amendment will do that for them. Now is the moment. No more games. No more gimmicks. The Constitution must be amended to keep the government in check. We’ve tried persuasion. We’ve tried negotiations. We’re tried elections. Nothing has worked.

Of course, McConnell wants to pass a "balanced budget amendment" which would require a 2/3 majority in order to raise taxes. But that's not all:

The worst idea in Washington - Ezra Klein - The Washington Post

Bruce Bartlett takes a look at the Balanced Budget Amendment all 47 Republicans signed their names to and pronounces it “quite possibly the stupidest constitutional amendment I think I have ever seen. It looks like it was drafted by a couple of interns on the back of a napkin.”

I think “stupid” is the wrong word. “Dangerous” is more like it. And maybe “radical.” This isn’t just a Balanced Budget Amendment. It also includes a provision saying that tax increases would require a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress — so, it includes a provision making it harder to balance the budget — and another saying that total spending couldn’t exceed 18 percent of GDP. No allowances are made for recessions, though allowances are made for wars. Not a single year of the Bush administration would qualify as constitutional under this amendment. Nor would a single year of the Reagan administration. The Clinton administration would’ve had exactly two years in which it wasn’t in violation.

Read that again: Every single Senate Republican has endorsed a constitutional amendment that would’ve made Ronald Reagan’s fiscal policy unconstitutional. That’s how far to the right the modern GOP has swung.

Can you imagine what the reaction would be if President Obama said we need to amend the constitution to change gun laws because elections haven't worked? Or President Obama saying we need to amend the constitution because elections haven't worked about anything?

Ok, the "elections" remark was stupid, agreed.
Because he basically admitted that our most recent election - the one where we had a shit load of dems replaced by reps - was futile since they haven't done shit either.

Besides that what is inherently wrong with a balanced budget amendment?

Is it because he suggests that it gets done without raising taxes?

 

[The Rabbi]

McConnell of course is correct. The current political system will not allow the pols involved to come to terms with a very difficult issue and resolve it. There are too many special interests pulling in different directions.
A budget amendment will help. But it does not solve the core problem.
To solve the core problem let's go back to: Election of senators by state legislatures; property qualifications for voting.
When we had those things seemed to work better.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So what Amendments do the Progressives want?

 

[Trajan]

The original article from ThinkProgress that includes the video and link to the article below:

Mitch McConnell: We Must Rewrite The Constitution Because ‘Elections’ Haven’t ‘Worked’ | ThinkProgress


YouTube - ‪McConnell Hates Democracy‬‏

Text of the video:

The time has come for a balanced budget amendment that forces Washington to balance its books. If these debt negotiations have convinced us of anything, it’s that we can’t leave it to politicians in Washington to make the difficult decisions that they need to get our fiscal house in order. The balanced budget amendment will do that for them. Now is the moment. No more games. No more gimmicks. The Constitution must be amended to keep the government in check. We’ve tried persuasion. We’ve tried negotiations. We’re tried elections. Nothing has worked.

Of course, McConnell wants to pass a "balanced budget amendment" which would require a 2/3 majority in order to raise taxes. But that's not all:

The worst idea in Washington - Ezra Klein - The Washington Post

Bruce Bartlett takes a look at the Balanced Budget Amendment all 47 Republicans signed their names to and pronounces it “quite possibly the stupidest constitutional amendment I think I have ever seen. It looks like it was drafted by a couple of interns on the back of a napkin.”

I think “stupid” is the wrong word. “Dangerous” is more like it. And maybe “radical.” This isn’t just a Balanced Budget Amendment. It also includes a provision saying that tax increases would require a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress — so, it includes a provision making it harder to balance the budget — and another saying that total spending couldn’t exceed 18 percent of GDP. No allowances are made for recessions, though allowances are made for wars. Not a single year of the Bush administration would qualify as constitutional under this amendment. Nor would a single year of the Reagan administration. The Clinton administration would’ve had exactly two years in which it wasn’t in violation.

Read that again: Every single Senate Republican has endorsed a constitutional amendment that would’ve made Ronald Reagan’s fiscal policy unconstitutional. That’s how far to the right the modern GOP has swung.

Can you imagine what the reaction would be if President Obama said we need to amend the constitution to change gun laws because elections haven't worked? Or President Obama saying we need to amend the constitution because elections haven't worked about anything?

your thread title is a mischaracterization...but you knew that.

Modbert-

Can you imagine what the reaction would be if President Obama said we need to amend the constitution to change gun laws because elections haven't worked? Or President Obama saying we need to amend the constitution because elections haven't worked about anything?

why yes becasue they are so alike....dude huh? .

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So what Amendments do the Progressives want?

Gay marriage of course. Clearly relevant to the real problems of this country unlike a balanced budget

 

[Trajan]

The original article from ThinkProgress that includes the video and link to the article below:

Mitch McConnell: We Must Rewrite The Constitution Because ‘Elections’ Haven’t ‘Worked’ | ThinkProgress


YouTube - ‪McConnell Hates Democracy‬‏

Text of the video:

The time has come for a balanced budget amendment that forces Washington to balance its books. If these debt negotiations have convinced us of anything, it’s that we can’t leave it to politicians in Washington to make the difficult decisions that they need to get our fiscal house in order. The balanced budget amendment will do that for them. Now is the moment. No more games. No more gimmicks. The Constitution must be amended to keep the government in check. We’ve tried persuasion. We’ve tried negotiations. We’re tried elections. Nothing has worked.

Of course, McConnell wants to pass a "balanced budget amendment" which would require a 2/3 majority in order to raise taxes. But that's not all:

The worst idea in Washington - Ezra Klein - The Washington Post

Bruce Bartlett takes a look at the Balanced Budget Amendment all 47 Republicans signed their names to and pronounces it “quite possibly the stupidest constitutional amendment I think I have ever seen. It looks like it was drafted by a couple of interns on the back of a napkin.”

I think “stupid” is the wrong word. “Dangerous” is more like it. And maybe “radical.” This isn’t just a Balanced Budget Amendment. It also includes a provision saying that tax increases would require a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress — so, it includes a provision making it harder to balance the budget — and another saying that total spending couldn’t exceed 18 percent of GDP. No allowances are made for recessions, though allowances are made for wars. Not a single year of the Bush administration would qualify as constitutional under this amendment. Nor would a single year of the Reagan administration. The Clinton administration would’ve had exactly two years in which it wasn’t in violation.

Read that again: Every single Senate Republican has endorsed a constitutional amendment that would’ve made Ronald Reagan’s fiscal policy unconstitutional. That’s how far to the right the modern GOP has swung.

Can you imagine what the reaction would be if President Obama said we need to amend the constitution to change gun laws because elections haven't worked? Or President Obama saying we need to amend the constitution because elections haven't worked about anything?

Ok, the "elections" remark was stupid, agreed.
Because he basically admitted that our most recent election - the one where we had a shit load of dems replaced by reps - was futile since they haven't done shit either.

Besides that what is inherently wrong with a balanced budget amendment?

Is it because he suggests that it gets done without raising taxes?

they were one vote away in what? 97, now its McConnell is crazier than a bed bug?

 

[Modbert]

your thread title is a mischaracterization...but you knew that.

Nope. He said we need to amend the constitution and that elections haven't worked. Unless you made the assumption it had to do with getting rid of elections. Nobody has made that comment so far however, so it seems just like you.

But I'll make it more clear so no reason to bitch and deflect away from what he said.

 

[The Rabbi]

So what Amendments do the Progressives want?

Gay marriage of course. Clearly relevant to the real problems of this country unlike a balanced budget

Yeah. They want to make it mandatory.

 

[Trajan]

your thread title is a mischaracterization...but you knew that.

Nope. He said we need to amend the constitution and that elections haven't worked. Unless you made the assumption it had to do with getting rid of elections. Nobody has made that comment so far however, so it seems just like you.

But I'll make it more clear so no reason to bitch and deflect away from what he said.

no I am just not looking for a wedge to mischaracterize or whats more, I am looking at context, I think its pretty clear that the message of the electorate ala elections , from McDonnell to Brown then November, has not sent the message that is at least imho pretty easy to fathom since there was one all consuming over arching message; spending, which needs to be heard and apparently hasn't, we need to cut and get our house in order.......hence a balanced budget amend..

and frankly you wanted honesty there it is, its protect themselves from themselves as well, I forget who said a few years ago but they said it straight out, you send us money we are going to spend it......*shrugs*

this is the quote in context;

The time has come for a balanced budget amendment that forces Washington to balance its books. If these debt negotiations have convinced us of anything, it’s that we can’t leave it to politicians in Washington to make the difficult decisions that they need to get our fiscal house in order. The balanced budget amendment will do that for them. Now is the moment. No more games. No more gimmicks. The Constitution must be amended to keep the government in check. We’ve tried persuasion. We’ve tried negotiations. We’re tried elections. Nothing has worked.

you have once again,let Think Progress program you, to tell you what to think and slant, hey once bitten...you know?

 

[Kuros]

McConnell: "Elections haven't worked."

Because you refuse to raise taxes!!!

*tears hair out*

 

[hortysir]

McConnell: "Elections haven't worked."

Because you refuse to raise taxes!!!

*tears hair out*

How much are you willing to have your's increased?

 

[GHook93]

This will become law eventually, stock up on your klenex's and deal with it.

Ps. How many threads do you need to bash one member of congress? If we all pointed out legislators that we deemed kooks their wouldnt be and serious discussion going on.... just sayin

Doubtful that it will become law. 2/3 of both Houses of Congress can propose an amendment to the constitution or 2/3 of the state legislatures can call for a constitutional convention (one CC has taken place is hsitory) to propose an amendment to the constitution. Then 3/4 of the States legislature must approve any amendment to get ratified. That is 38 states for the math challenged. I highly doubt a controversial amendment like this would get that kind of support, even if it does make sense (we some tweeks). Same goes the anti-gay marriage amendments or protection of life/pro-life amendments.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

McConnell: "Elections haven't worked."

Because you refuse to raise taxes!!!

*tears hair out*

How much are you willing to have your's increased?

It's pointless... if you raised the tax rate to 100% on all the assets of the wealthiest, it would generate less than $1,000,000,000,000.

It's a bogus argument.

 

[Modbert]

you have once again,let Think Progress program you, to tell you what to think and slant, hey once bitten...you know?

Wrong. I know exactly what the quote says. I put the whole quote in my OP or did you just decide to ignore it?

McConnell thinks that elections have failed so therefore we need to amend the Constitution to put in a balanced budget amendment. Though said amendment has already been pointed out to be flawed and allow Congress itself many loopholes.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

McConnell: "Elections haven't worked."

Because you refuse to raise taxes!!!

*tears hair out*

How much are you willing to have your's increased?

I doubt he would agree to $.01 over the $0 he currently pays.

 

[Jack Fate]

your thread title is a mischaracterization...but you knew that.

Nope. He said we need to amend the constitution and that elections haven't worked. Unless you made the assumption it had to do with getting rid of elections. Nobody has made that comment so far however, so it seems just like you.

But I'll make it more clear so no reason to bitch and deflect away from what he said.

What he said was is elections had not solved the debt problem. He didn't say to do away with elections.

 

[Modbert]

He didn't say to do away with elections.

I never said he did either. Show me otherwise.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What's wrong with a balanced budget amendment? States have them.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Anyhoo.. aren't you lefties always touting "paygo"?

Now, "paygo" is a "no go"?