[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 18 (Monday, January 30, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E214-E215]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


        PROPOSING A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION

                                 ______


                               speech of

                        HON. DONALD A. MANZULLO

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, January 27, 1995

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the joint resolution (H.J. 
     Res. 1) proposing a balanced budget amendment to the 
     Constitution of the United States:

  Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, a balanced budget is the best way to 
ensure the future economic prosperity of the United States. It is a 
long-term solution to a long-term problem. Congress, over the past 40 
years, has been full of big spenders who couldn't restrain their 
proclivity to spend. A balanced budget limits the powers of Government 
and brings stability to the budget-making process.
  Deficits are not a short-term trend. The Federal Government has run a 
deficit for 56 of the last 64 years, and the last 24 years in a row. 
Congress has tried to change its free-spending ways, but countless 
budget deals have done very little. In the 1920's, Federal spending as 
a percentage of GNP was 3 percent; in 1940 it was 10 percent; and in 
1992 it was 22.4 percent. Eliminating the deficit is one of the most 
urgent priorities facing the country. We can't begin to tackle our near 
$5 trillion national debt until the Federal budget runs a surplus. And 
unless we begin to repay our debt soon, this country will be headed for 
a deep and prolonged economic crisis.
  When it comes to balancing the budget, the deficit is a convenient 
target for election year attacks. But when it comes to getting 
reelected, deficit spending is the key. Why? First, intense pressure 
for spending tends to override a generalized preference for fiscal 
restraint and balanced budgets. In the short run, deficit spending is 
the most painless political option and the path of least resistance. In 
other words, wasteful spending has a curious appeal to deficit-hostile 
constituents when it is in their own district. Second, intense pressure 
for spending tends to override the general, diffused targets of most 
tax increases. Tax increases are purposely spread out enough so they 
don't spark a Boston tea party. For Congress, it's easy to tax and 
easier to spend, making it almost impossible to balance the budget.
  Mr. Chairman, a long-term, structural response is needed to reverse a 
long-term, structural problem. The solution is a balanced budget 
amendment to the Constitution. I don't take this step lightly, but it's 
one that Thomas Jefferson endorsed. An amendment reestablishes a level 
playing field, forcing Congress to place higher priority on balancing 
the budget rather than spending and taxing. It restores the 
Constitution's goal of limited government.
  Some critics of this legislation contend that it will unfairly impact 
Social Security. Nothing could be further from the truth. These critics 
say that Social Security is not part of the deficit problem. I agree 
completely. Social Security is soundly financed and runs a surplus 
[[Page E215]] every year. However, a constitutional amendment to 
require a balanced budget does not change Social Security in any way.
  Current laws on the books that protect Social Security would not be 
changed by the amendment. For example, Social Security is exempt from 
across-the-board budget cuts. The trust fund is already excluded from 
deficit calculations. The amendment does not change those laws in any 
way.
  Taking Social Security and other worthy problems off-budget under the 
amendment would open up a loophole to evade the intent of the proposal. 
It would set a precedent for other Government programs to simply by 
shifting enough Government programs into off-budget accounts. This 
would only make matters worse. I'm sure you wouldn't do this with your 
own check book. That's why I don't want to make an exception for the 
Government.
  In fact, a constitutional amendment to the Constitution requiring a 
balanced budget is critical to the long-term health of Social Security, 
forcing Congress to bring the deficit to zero so future politicians 
will not be tempted to cover our Nation's huge debt with the Social 
Security surplus set aside for the baby-boomer generation.
  Mr. Chairman, since I took office, I have had the courage to 
consistently vote against wasteful spending over 300 times to cut $175 
billion. Unfortunately, most of Congress did not agree. If we do not 
respond to our long-term problem with a long-term solution, large 
Federal deficits and low private saving will lead to increasingly 
costly and precarious dependence on foreign capital, and less 
investment to modernize and expand the economy. All this will result in 
smaller gains in productivity and a lower standard of living for our 
children and grandchildren. Mr. Chairman, Congress must vote for the 
balanced budget amendment to save future generations from this 
unconscionable economic burden.


                          ____________________