[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 16 (Thursday, January 26, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E189]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                   BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT OR BUST

                                 ______


                          HON. STEVE GUNDERSON

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, January 26, 1995
  Mr. GUNDERSON. Mr. Speaker, I have been looking forward to this day 
since I was elected to the Congress 15 years ago. The first bill I ever 
introduced, and the first speech I ever gave on the floor of the House, 
called for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Back then 
the deficit was about $74 billion, far less than what we face today. 
But a number of us thought that a $74 billion deficit was a serious 
problem because it was a drag on the economy and it saddled future 
generations with obligations that are not of their own making. We felt 
that an amendment to the Constitution was necessary to impose some 
fiscal discipline and ensure that Congress would make the tough choices 
necessary to balance the budget. Unfortunately, we weren't successful 
then in persuading our colleagues.
  Fifteen years later, with the deficit at $202 billion and over $3.5 
trillion added to the national debt, it is time to get this done. The 
deficit is an even greater weight slowing down our economy. Our 
national debt is so large that almost $130 billion of the fiscal year 
1994 budget must be devoted to interest payments on the debt. That is 
more than half of our current budget deficit. It is more than four 
times what we currently spend on all discretionary education, training, 
and social services programs. Similarly, the dollars that future 
generations will need to pay back our debt are funds that could 
otherwise be spent on improving roads, supporting programs for 
disadvantaged students, or reducing our tax burden. Instead, these 
dollars will go to investors that have lent the Federal Government 
money by purchasing Government securities. This must stop.
  While I have argued that the best solution would be to pass a 
straightforward amendment requiring that Federal outlays not be 
permitted to exceed Federal revenues, many here in Congress support 
adding a three-fifths majority requirement for any future increase in 
taxes. While it is true that the Federal Government has become 
inefficient and we need to slim it down, I have concerns about tieing 
the hands of future Congresses on how we should attain balanced 
budgets. Nevertheless, I think such concerns, while important, are 
outweighed by the urgent need to pass a balanced budget amendment. 
Further, a three-fifths majority requirement was included in the 
version described in the contract With America. While I voted for the 
three-fifths majority requirement, I urge all of my colleagues to 
support House Joint Resolution 1, the balanced budget amendment, 
whether or not they vote for the three-fifths majority requirement. We 
cannot allow another decade or more of deficits to pass before we stop 
adding to the looming debt of this country. We must begin the process 
of restoring fiscal responsibility to the congressional budget process.


                          ____________________