BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, I oppose this amendment to our Constitution that purports to balance our nation's budget, but instead serves merely as an excuse for Congress to avoid the real responsibilities of governing. When the balanced budget amendment freight train was moving through Congress in 1995 and a number of people piled on, it passed in the House overwhelmingly, but it failed in the Senate by one vote. The only Republican who voted no was Senator Mark Hatfield. As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, he was visited repeatedly by some of the most ardent proponents of a "balanced budget,'' asking him for special treatment so that they might spend more money in their home states. Senator Hatfield recognized that, in his words, a vote for a balanced budget amendment is, "not a vote for a balanced budget, it is a vote for a fig leaf.''
Amending the Constitution to require a balanced budget is an irresponsible approach to fiscal discipline. It does not balance the budget; instead, it would restrict the government's ability to provide for the common welfare, to respond to economic crises and natural disasters, and to invest in America. Under a balanced budget amendment, recessions would be longer and deeper because Congress would be forced to raise taxes, cut spending, or both in order to meet the constitutional mandate. This flies in the face of sound economic policy. If the balanced budget amendment were in effect today, it would throw 15 million more people out of work, double the unemployment rate, and slash our economy by 17 percent.
It would also require devastating cuts to critical programs like Social Security, Medicare, and veteran's benefits. No program would be spared: education, job training, natural resources, environmental and financial protection, and transportation would all suffer under spending cuts. Yet a balanced budget amendment would do nothing for the corporate tax loopholes and benefits for the wealthy that cost taxpayers billions of dollars.
A balanced budget amendment limits the government's response to natural disasters. This year alone, our country has experienced flooding, tornadoes, hurricanes and earthquakes that have taken hundreds of lives and caused billions of dollars in damage. Our communities need immediate support to help those who are injured and without a home, and to help clean up the devastation. A balanced budget amendment would tie the government's hands by requiring the slow machinery of Congress to act before relief could be given to suffering families.
A popular argument in favor of a balanced budget amendment is that families across the country must live within their means, and thus, so should Congress. But few families paid cash for their home. And few students paid cash for their college education. Families in Oregon borrow money for important investments that will build their lifetime wealth and improve the quality of their lives. Congress must be able to make similar investments to rebuild and renew America--shoring up the country's crumbling infrastructure, repairing our dilapidated schools, and creating the energy resources that will drive the future of our economy.
Balancing the budget does not require a constitutional amendment. It requires courage and compromise.
After Senator Hatfield courageously voted no on the balanced budget amendment in 1995, Congress in fact was able to move forward to rein in spending and raise an appropriate level of revenue that balanced the budget for four consecutive years. Unfortunately, when Republicans took control of Congress and the Bush administration took power, restraint was lost, our nation's wealth was given away, deficits skyrocketed, and their tax cut and spending policies drive our deficit to this day.
A balanced budget amendment is a phony solution. Instead, members of Congress must stand up and work together to provide a balance of increased revenues and sensible spending cuts. Doing otherwise merely avoids our responsibilities and is an insult to the people who sent us to represent them in Congress.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT