Constitutional Amendment Proposal

[jwoodie]

I realize this could only be proposed by a Constitutional Convention called for by 2/3 of the States, but here goes:

The Federal Government shall not increase per capita spending in any program in any year that projected federal revenues do not equal or exceed projected expenditures.

This is would essentially freeze COLAs in any year that the federal budget is not balanced, but would allow for increases in the number of people receiving federal money during economic downturns. The idea is to create a consensus behind more efficient federal tax and spending policies: The sooner the budget is balanced, the sooner you get a COLA.

Any comments/suggestions?

 

[Listening]

I realize this could only be proposed by a Constitutional Convention called for by 2/3 of the States, but here goes:

The Federal Government shall not increase per capita spending in any program in any year that projected federal revenues do not equal or exceed projected expenditures.

This is would essentially freeze COLAs in any year that the federal budget is not balanced, but would allow for increases in the number of people receiving federal money during economic downturns. The idea is to create a consensus behind more efficient federal tax and spending policies: The sooner the budget is balanced, the sooner you get a COLA.

Any comments/suggestions?

While the words "efficient" and "policies" don't really belong together....it is interesting to think we could somehow strap congress with contraints.

Do you think they'd find a way around them.

They passed the AMT and every year they pass a "patch". Losers.

 

[FA_Q2]

I realize this could only be proposed by a Constitutional Convention called for by 2/3 of the States, but here goes:

The Federal Government shall not increase per capita spending in any program in any year that projected federal revenues do not equal or exceed projected expenditures.

This is would essentially freeze COLAs in any year that the federal budget is not balanced, but would allow for increases in the number of people receiving federal money during economic downturns. The idea is to create a consensus behind more efficient federal tax and spending policies: The sooner the budget is balanced, the sooner you get a COLA.

Any comments/suggestions?

While the words "efficient" and "policies" don't really belong together....it is interesting to think we could somehow strap congress with contraints.

Do you think they'd find a way around them.

They passed the AMT and every year they pass a "patch". Losers.

Yes, actually we could. A simply worded amendment. That binds congress in a way that is VERY tough to overcome and simply will not happen as long as the people are even remotely vigilant. Of course the problem is that we are where we are at today because we lost that very vigilance that is needed.

Until the electorate wakes up, nothing will change. It may look hopeless now but I would not write off America yet. When things actually get tough, people will start to notice.