[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 59 (Thursday, April 12, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H3157-H3158]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Massie) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, here we are, 4 legislative days after 
passing a $1.3 trillion omnibus bill that is going to blow the deficit 
through the roof. And what are we going to do today? Oh, don't worry. 
We are going to fix it all. We are going to vote for the balanced 
budget amendment. That is right. This is going to tie our hands. This 
balanced budget amendment will cure everything that ails Congress. It 
is going to balance the budget. It is going to make us balance the 
budget.
  Mr. Speaker, there is a dictionary over here in the House of 
Representatives, 30 feet from me. I suggest we go in there and rewrite 
the definition of ``audacity,'' because it is that quality of Congress 
that leads them to believe that 4 legislative days after they blow the 
budget they can pass a balanced budget amendment and think that will 
convince America that they are serious about balancing the budget. That 
is the definition of audacity.
  Look, this is an unserious vote. We know this balanced budget 
amendment is going nowhere in the Senate. But this is a very serious 
topic. This is the Constitution we are talking about amending. This is 
the document we swore an oath to uphold, support, defend. Our Founding 
Fathers died for it.
  What is wrong with this balanced budget amendment? Well, first of 
all, let me tell you, it has got a loophole you could drive a truck 
through. Section 1, the very first part of this balanced budget 
amendment, says, if three-fifths of the whole number of each House of 
Congress pass a budget that is unbalanced, that is fine, but you have 
got to get three-fifths vote. Okay. Higher threshold. That will cause 
us to balance the budget. Three-fifths is hard to get, isn't it?

[[Page H3158]]

  How many? What is three-fifths? Sixty percent. How many Members of 
Congress voted for that omnibus bill 4 legislative days ago? 60.5 
percent in the House. How many in the Senate? More than that.

                              {time}  1100

  This balanced budget amendment wouldn't have stopped the omnibus 
bill. There is something worse in this balanced budget amendment. Any 
year that we are at war, it does not apply. Let's think about that.
  The first day of Congress, we elect the Speaker. We are going to 
elect a new one this time. We elect the Speaker. We adopt the rules. 
The third order of business will be to declare war so we don't have to 
follow the balanced budget amendment. That is a loophole right there, 
but it is a dangerous one.
  Some people say: Well, at least we will start declaring wars. We 
haven't declared a war since World War II. Maybe it will get Congress 
to do its job, its constitutional duty.
  Well, I don't think so. We have been at war in Afghanistan for 17 
years, and this article in the balanced budget amendment says: Well, 
you don't have to be at war as long as there is a conflict with our 
national security at stake. Oh, you can forget the balanced budget 
amendment.
  What does that mean? For the last 17 years, this balanced budget 
amendment wouldn't apply to the war in Afghanistan or Iraq, where we 
have racked up trillions of dollars of debt. The balanced budget 
amendment would do nothing to stop that.
  Look, I am not against the concept of an amendment to the 
Constitution that limits the growth of government. This government is 
so much bigger than it was when our Founders started this country, and 
for many years thereafter, but that is not what this balanced budget 
amendment does. It is not carefully crafted.
  The thought that our Founders put into the Constitution has not been 
put into this document. It has not even been debated in a committee. 
Yet, today, we are going to vote on it. How ridiculous is that?
  So here is what I think we need to do. Instead of having a balanced 
budget amendment that encourages you to go to war, that is toothless, 
that encourages you to raise taxes instead of cut spending, we need a 
balanced budget amendment that somehow limits the growth of government. 
Frankly, what we need are people here that are serious about balancing 
the budget, not another document, not an unserious proposal.
  So I would just say this. I know this is a popular concept to have a 
balanced budget amendment. I am not going to urge a ``yes'' vote or a 
``no'' vote or a ``present'' vote. I am going to vote ``no'' because it 
is an unserious approach to a serious topic, and it should be called 
``the CYA,'' not ``the BBA,'' but I just want my colleagues to think 
deeply and long about this amendment.
  Please read it. Please read it before you vote on it. It is right 
here. It is only three pages. Please read it. Think deeply before you 
cast your vote to alter this sacred document.

                          ____________________