[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 16480-16487]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          BALANCING THE BUDGET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we are going to talk about 
a very important development here in the House of Representatives--in 
fact, in the entire Congress. Because of the vote this summer on the 
Budget Control Act, we are going to have in both the House and the 
Senate for the first time in about 15 years a vote on a balanced budget 
amendment to the United States Constitution. The last time we did this 
was on March 2, 1995--actually, the House had already passed it with 
300 bipartisan votes, and it was brought to the Senate floor on that 
day. The U.S. Senate failed by one vote to send a balanced budget 
amendment to the States for ratification. The amendment had passed the 
House by the required two-thirds majority previously, and the Senate 
vote was the last legislative hurdle before ratification by the States.
  As we know, balanced budget amendments--in fact, any constitutional 
amendment is voted on by the House and the Senate, requiring a two-
thirds vote in each body, and then it does not go to the President of 
the United States, as legislation does. Instead, it goes directly to 
our States, and then three-quarters of the State legislatures would be 
required to ratify it.
  If that amendment had passed, then we would not be dealing with the 
fiscal crisis we now face. If that amendment had passed, then balancing 
the budget would have been the norm rather than the exception over the 
past 15 years, and we would have nothing like the annual deficits and 
skyrocketing debt that we must address today.
  The good news is that, like 1995, this Congress is again standing at 
a crossroads at this very moment. The decisions we make today will 
steer the direction of the country for the next 15 years. We have an 
opportunity now to take action to ensure that 15 years from today our 
children will face a much brighter fiscal picture. We must not allow 
ourselves to miss this opportunity.
  Experience has proven time and again that Congress cannot, for any

[[Page 16481]]

significant length of time, rein in excessive spending. The annual 
deficits and the resulting debt continue to grow due to political 
pressures and a dependency on government programs. In order for 
Congress to be able to consistently make the very tough decisions 
necessary to sustain fiscal responsibility over the long term, Congress 
must have an external pressure to force it to do so. The most realistic 
change we have today to enact this type of institutional reform is 
through a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution.
  Many Members of Congress have introduced balanced budget amendments 
in this Congress. I introduced two versions on the first day of the 
112th Congress.
  H.J. Res. 2 is the exact text that passed the House in 1995 and 
failed in the Senate by one vote. This amendment requires total annual 
outlays not to exceed total annual receipts. It also requires a three-
fifths majority to raise the debt limit. This legislation also has 
limited exceptions for times of war.
  H.J. Res. 1, which I also introduced, goes much further. In addition 
to the provisions of H.J. Res. 2, it requires a two-thirds majority to 
raise taxes and imposes an annual spending cap that prohibits spending 
from exceeding 18 percent of GDP.
  In the U.S. Senate, 47 Republican Senators--all the Republican 
Senators--have cosponsored a balanced budget amendment, which is a 
strong sign that the Senate is ready to engage in debate on this 
subject as well.
  Our extraordinary fiscal crisis demands an extraordinary solution, so 
we simply cannot afford to succumb to political posturing on this issue 
at a point in time so crucial to our Nation's future. We must rise 
above that and move forward with a strategy that includes legislation 
that will get to 290 votes on the House floor.
  So as we consider a balanced budget amendment, I encourage the 
Members of the body to devote our efforts to passing the strongest 
balanced budget amendment that can garner two-thirds of the House of 
Representatives. We're at a crossroads in the country. We can make the 
tough choices and control spending, paving the way for our return to 
surpluses and ultimately paying down the national debt, or we can allow 
big spenders to lead us further down the road of chronic deficits and 
leave our children and grandchildren saddled with debt that is not 
their own.
  I have been joined by a number of outstanding Members of the House, 
and I am going to call upon them to offer some comments about the 
importance of a balanced budget amendment to them and to their 
constituents as well.
  Since he got here first, I'm going to yield first to one of our new 
Members, from the State of Indiana, a great fiscal conservative, 
someone who believes strongly in limiting our government and balancing 
our budget, Congressman Todd Rokita.
  Mr. ROKITA. I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding 
me this time and for your leadership here in the Congress year after 
year over the years to see that we've come to this point where we again 
can have a vote in these Chambers about the condition of our country 
and about living within our means.
  As I talk about the balanced budget amendment, I want to also address 
what happened here on the House floor and what was said here on the 
House floor in the last hour. They used the term ``foolish'' several 
times. I want to describe how foolish what they said is.
  Not enough dollars exist in the top 1 percent of taxpayers in this 
country to possibly address the debt situation we face, to possibly 
address our economy. There are not enough baseball players. There are 
not enough football coaches. There are not enough Oprah Winfreys. There 
are not even enough Warren Buffetts. Even if you taxed 100 percent of 
everything they made and assume two things, that they wouldn't leave 
the country and that they would continue to produce, there aren't 
enough of them to solve this country's fiscal problems.
  So when people come here to the House floor or talk anywhere else in 
this Nation about how the rich aren't paying their fair share, by 
definition, they are going to come after the middle class. They are 
going to come after your property, those of us who live in the middle 
class. Our property being our dollars, which aren't theirs, which 
aren't the government's. They're ours. And that's what they're angling 
for; make no mistake about it.
  As you may know, I happen to be a member of the House Education and 
Workforce Committee. A lot of talk was made here today about how we 
don't spend enough on our education; we have to spend more on our 
teachers. Let me just say this: The increase in our Federal budget for 
education has been well over 300 percent since the early 1970s, yet we 
haven't seen one bit of an improvement in our scholastic scores since 
the Federal Government has been involved in the education business.

                              {time}  1550

  I just find it humorous when they stand here and talk about how we 
need to now spend money on infrastructure, now spend money on other 
things that might marginally give us some more jobs. Where were they 
during the first stimulus when only 6 percent, almost a trillion 
dollars, went for infrastructure and the rest went for handouts like 
food stamps, unemployment insurance and other things that won't 
possibly grow the economy? Not to say that people didn't need help, not 
to say they still don't need help. But it's a falsehood to think that 
by giving more handouts you're going to improve the prosperity of this 
Nation.
  You cannot tax, you cannot spend, you cannot lay debt on our kids and 
grandkids and expect this Nation to get stronger, expect this Nation to 
be better off. It doesn't work. World history is littered with examples 
where Nations have tried to do this very same thing; and all it has 
resulted in is tyranny and the opposite of prosperity.
  With that, thank you again for letting me speak about the balanced 
budget amendment. I opposed the Budget Control Act when we had that 
vote at the end of July because it wasn't a solution to our debt 
problem; it was another Washington deal. But as I've said and will 
continue to admit, there was a silver lining, and that silver lining 
was the requirement that both Houses at least take a vote on the exact 
same balanced budget amendment language, and they do it by December 31 
of this year.
  Our Constitution is the blueprint for our system of government. Our 
Constitution has only been amended 27 times, and for very good reason. 
It's not to change with the times. It's not to change with the 
political winds. It's a blueprint, a document that has outlined a 
process, contained in it negative rights, that has given us the best 
system for raising the condition of all men that the world has ever 
seen. And so it shouldn't be amended that often or that lightheartedly, 
but it should be amended in this case.
  This Chamber, this House, this Federal Government in general, 
administrations both Republican and Democratic before us, have failed 
in their job to have us as a Federal Government live within our means. 
We need a constitutional amendment to do that now. Thomas Jefferson 
himself even said it: ``I wish it were possible to attain a single 
amendment to our Constitution, I mean an additional article taking from 
the government the power of borrowing.''
  Given our $15 trillion debt and what's coming, the red menace, the 
tidal wave of debt that's coming in the near future, there is a clear 
need for a balanced budget amendment.
  Now, there are several different ones to consider. Which one should 
we take up? I would love to have a balanced budget amendment that 
contained a supermajority vote for us to even consider raising taxes in 
order to balance the budget. I would love a balanced budget amendment 
with language that contained an indication that the Federal Government 
cannot exceed 20 percent of GDP. That would be spectacular. In this 
season of football, I'd call that a touchdown pass that wins the game. 
But there are other plays as well. And I'll take a 50-yard pass; I'll 
take a 75-yard pass that gets us so far

[[Page 16482]]

down the field on this debt issue that it puts us in a position to win 
the day, ``winning'' meaning we save the Republic, we keep the Republic 
like Franklin suggested. So I would support a clean balanced budget 
amendment. Clean meaning a statement that simply says we will not spend 
more than we take in. Our expenditures will equal or be less than the 
revenues we take in.
  Now, some of my very good conservative colleagues would say, well, 
you're setting us up for one day raising taxes. That may be true. But 
in all honesty, that's a different fight. We can have that tax fight 
later. Liberals love to raise taxes because their solution to 
everything is a bigger government, and the only way to have a bigger 
government is to have a more expensive government. That will never 
change. So let's not have the perfect be the enemy of the good. Let's 
have that fight. And if once in awhile they win, we know that the 
people who win that fight won't be here for long. And in the meantime, 
we have an amendment in our Constitution that declares each one of us, 
as we take the oath to uphold the Constitution, ensures that we will 
live within our means.
  I thank the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gentleman from Indiana for his remarks.
  We are joined now by a very important member of our conference, a 
leader, the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee 
and a strong supporter of fiscal responsibility and a balanced budget 
amendment, the gentleman from Texas, Congressman Pete Sessions.
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you today for your strong 
leadership and the leadership of other members of this conference for 
bringing forth a discussion about a balanced budget for the United 
States of America. In fact, the United States Congress has brought up 
this issue before, and it has been debated and discussed obviously 
since not just the time of the signing of the Declaration of 
Independence, but for many, many years afterwards.
  Mr. Speaker, I would say to you today that every single Member of 
this body should recognize the times that we live in are unlike any 
that this great Nation has ever seen.
  We find that we are in the midst of a threat of outside forces 
against the United States. We find ourselves in a time of war. We find 
ourselves in a time when we have political unrest with thousands of 
people encamped in our cities who are displeased with the direction 
that this country is going. We have millions of people, some 14 million 
people who are unemployed in America, some 6 million who are 
underemployed in this country.
  We've seen out-of-control spending that has taken place from a 
Federal Government that is not accountable. They tax too much, they 
spend too much, and they listen too little. We have leaders of this 
country who are not honest in speaking to the American people about not 
only the truths of each party and what they stand for, but who I 
believe mislead others about the things for which they stand for 
themselves.
  We find ourselves at a time in this country where we are faced with a 
$14 trillion debt that is growing every single day. In fact, if any 
American looks at the debt clock, they will see that it's spinning 
wildly out of control.
  Mr. Speaker, I did not come to this body, nor probably did others, to 
think that they would be here to manage our demise. We come to 
Washington full of hope and opportunity, with the expectations to 
further the dreams of the American people, to further dreams for an 
experience that would allow us to enrich our lives but also to leave 
that that would be the best for the next generation. As an Eagle Scout 
I grew up scouting and understanding that you should always leave your 
circumstances better than what you found it.
  Now, I'm well aware that the President of the United States, 
President Obama, keeps talking about that this is a vision that he has 
about a direction, but there is no end in sight to the damage and harm, 
the carnage that is being laid to this country as a result of economic 
demise. But what I would say, Mr. Speaker, is there are others who have 
traveled down this road ahead of us, and we are watching them today and 
we've been watching them for years as the very fabric of their 
countries becomes torn apart.

                              {time}  1600

  The essential ingredients that made those countries strong, not that 
put them on the map, but that gave them a heritage, a meaning and a 
national purpose, they are now seeing with this current generation are 
falling apart. I would say as my message today I stand strong with Bob 
Goodlatte and Randy Hultgren. We have Brother Rokita here, we have 
Scott Garrett from New Jersey, and we have even a Member from as far 
south as Mississippi, Steven Palazzo, who are going to come forth on 
this floor and talk about the need for America to gather itself with 
discipline and strength to add to the spirit and the resiliency of the 
American people, that of entrepreneurship, that of tough love and hard 
work that will make this country stronger and better.
  I stand here, Mr. Speaker, as a result of understanding, as other 
Members of this body that have circumstances that are very similar to 
mine. I have a future that I want to leave better than what I found it. 
I have two sons, one that's in the top 2 percent academically of 
students in this country, and one that is in the bottom 2 percent of 
students academically. And the future of this country is very important 
to them, perhaps more important than mine was to me.
  But on my son who is in the top 2 percent academically, Bill, the 
future of his American Dream is being threatened because he wants to be 
a physician. And physician after physician, those in the health care 
field, are saying, Bill, don't do that. This is his dream. On Alex's 
side, as a Down Syndrome young man, he is faced with a sure future 
where he will be competing against all of us for the needs that he 
should have as a disabled young man that should be the mission 
statement of this government. Yet, the Federal Government will be 
incapable and unable to perform because they are trying to take on 
everybody, and thus they will not do their job right.
  Former Senator Phil Gramm from Texas would speak about this often 
years ago when the same threat of a Clinton health care plan existed. 
Now it's the law. And Senator Gramm would talk about that, that little 
red wagon that is designed for just a few people that the Federal 
Government should get it right and support with government assistance--
those with a physical or intellectual disability, those who are seniors 
like our parents, yes, my parents at 81 years old who have served this 
country so well, so honorably and deserve a chance to be in that wagon 
in their latter years and, lastly, those who are too poor to take care 
of themselves.
  Mr. Speaker, this balanced budget will ensure that we try and create 
a mission statement with this Federal Government that is not about 
expanding itself to where it is not within a mission statement, but one 
where it is within a mission statement where we are going to require 
the Federal Government to do a few things and do them well, because 
we're not going to have the money unless we give it to them through 
economic growth. And with economic growth, people can have their own 
dreams and not depend on government.
  So why we're all here today there could be different reasons. But it 
will boil down to this: that the men and women of this body, some of 
whom I have spoken about, including the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. 
Brooks) who's joined us, are here for a mission and a purpose, and that 
is to join with Chairman Bob Goodlatte from Virginia and say to him 
that we want to leave America a better place than what we found it; and 
we believe bankruptcy debt, misery, and loss of jobs is not the right 
future.
  I heartily sign back up for this important effort again, which I led 
in '97, '98 and '99. I, once again, sign my name to that pledge. I am 
for a balanced

[[Page 16483]]

budget to leave America a better place than we found it. I thank the 
gentleman for yielding me time.
  Godspeed and good luck, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Thank you for your good work. Thank you for your 
efforts on behalf of this cause.
  I want to make reference to the fact that this Special Order that 
we're all participating in is sponsored by the House Constitution 
Caucus, which is chaired by Congressman Scott Garrett of New Jersey. 
We'll hear from him in a few minutes.
  But now I want to yield to another new Member of Congress who has 
been very, very instrumental in working on a balanced budget amendment 
and has made a number of good, constructive observations and 
recommendations about this issue, and that's Congressman Mo Brooks from 
Alabama.
  Mr. BROOKS. I thank the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. Speaker, America faces a financial threat of historic 
proportions. It has one basic cause. We suffer from unsustainable 
budget deficits that threaten America with insolvency and bankruptcy. 
We have seen what's been going on in Europe with Greece and with Paris 
from a few years ago, with Rome, with riots in Greece where there's 
even been fatalities. All of these relate to the financial stewardship 
of their governments.
  I hope that with the remarks I'm about to share that the people of 
America will have a better understanding of the deficit situation we 
face, because given that understanding, I have confidence, Mr. Speaker, 
that the American people will cause Washington to do the right thing.
  A little bit of history is in order. I've got a chart here, the 
United States annual deficits. The last balanced budget we had was $128 
billion, fiscal year '01, a Democrat President, Bill Clinton, a 
Republican House and Republican Senate. Since that time, we've had 9/11 
and we've had wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You can see how the deficit 
situation became worse. George Bush as President and Republicans in 
control of Congress to $158 billion to $377 billion to $413 billion. 
All of those were bad, no question.
  Notably, we have the Bush tax cuts in the summer of 2003; and, 
paradoxically, from one perspective across the aisle, things should 
have gotten worse, but they got better because our economy improved and 
our deficit declined to $318 billion to $248 billion to $161 billion. 
We were on the right path as of November 2006.
  Then we had a different mindset capture the United States House and 
the United States Senate. We had a different Speaker of the House, a 
different majority leader in the United States Senate, and a different 
philosophy of government and a different economic philosophy that 
unfortunately has failed miserably.
  As a consequence, after the November 2006 elections where the 
Democrats captured the United States Congress, we have a $459 billion 
deficit followed by a $1.4 trillion deficit. Then we have a change in 
the White House. For 2 years, two budgets, two sets of expenditures and 
two sets of revenues were totally controlled by the other party, my 
colleagues across the aisle. In FY10 and FY11, the fiscal year that we 
just finished, we had back-to-back $1.3 trillion and $1.3 trillion 
deficits.
  Ladies and gentlemen, these deficits were bad. These are 
unsustainable trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, and 
they're a great risk to our Nation. To put it into perspective, that's 
$2.3 trillion in revenue last year, $3.6 trillion in expenditures, a 
$1.3 trillion deficit, and a $14.3 trillion accumulated debt. With what 
happened with the Budget Control Act in August of this year, a bill 
that I voted against, the debt ceiling was increased by $2.4 trillion 
such that it will soon hit a $16.2 trillion debt burden in 2013.
  Now, I mention trillions, and people's eyes often start to glaze 
over, Mr. Speaker. Let me put it down in a family sense where hopefully 
the American people can better understand it. Think in terms of a 
family that's uncertain about their income. So they go over their 
finances, and they discover that over the last 3 years they've averaged 
$50,000 a year in income--not too bad. And then they look at their 
expenses, and they've been averaging $80,000 a year in expenses. That's 
scary to them, and it should be. They've been in the hole 3 straight 
years for $30,000 a year. Then they pick up their Visa bill, and it's 
for $320,000.
  Now what do you think that family would do? Well, they'd cut their 
spending and they would try to balance their budget in order to avoid 
bankruptcy. Those analogies are exactly the same as that of the United 
States of America--those ratios.

                              {time}  1610

  We have to have a balanced budget constitutional amendment, I submit 
to the American people, Mr. Speaker, because that is the only way 
Washington will have the backbone to do the right thing, to protect 
future generations from the risk of insolvency and bankruptcy that we 
in America face today.
  So I wholeheartedly endorse the efforts of Representative Goodlatte 
and all the other members of the Constitutional Caucus who have been 
working so hard to come forth with a substantive, effective, and 
enforceable constitutional amendment that can help save our children 
and grandchildren from the seriousness of the financial situation that 
we in America face today.
  As for me, Mr. Speaker, I will do my utmost to support a balanced 
budget constitutional amendment. I will do my utmost to ensure that it 
is an effective constitutional amendment, that it's not a dog and pony 
show, that, in fact, it will achieve the desired result.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gentleman for his very passionate support 
of the cause of fiscal responsibility.
  As I mentioned earlier, this Special Order is being sponsored by the 
Congressional Constitution Caucus. And it's now my pleasure to yield to 
another great champion of limited government and lower taxes and less 
government regulation and balancing the budget, Congressman Scott 
Garrett of New Jersey.
  Mr. GARRETT. I thank the gentleman for not only managing the floor 
tonight with regard to this conference, but also with regard to all 
your great work with regard to trying to push forward the BBA, making 
sure we get over the goal line this time.
  As the chairman and founder of the Constitutional Caucus, we rarely 
come to the floor to advocate for an amendment to the Constitution, but 
that's exactly what we're doing here tonight. It brings us here tonight 
because the United States Government has what? Just as the other 
speakers have said, overspent, overborrowed, and overtaxed, putting 
this Nation on the road to fiscal ruin. Yet, as much as that is true, 
there are many who believe that the solution going forward is even more 
of the same: more spending, more borrowing, more taxation. And only 
here in Washington, DC, could that ever be given serious consideration.
  American families are not given that luxury. American families have 
to do what? They have to live within their means or face fiscal 
disaster in their family pocketbook. So, too, here in the United States 
Government we should live within our means as well; but unfortunately, 
today, as you saw the previous chart and previous speaker, we have been 
incapable of doing that. And that is why we're here tonight because we 
know we must force ourselves to do so through a balanced budget 
amendment.
  Now, step back. Amending the Constitution is a difficult process. It 
should not be entered into lightly. The process reflects the Founders' 
commitment to republican self-government while protecting what? The 
integrity of the supreme law of the land.
  And so in the spirit, then, of the Founders' vision for an amendment 
to the Constitution, we support tonight a balanced budget amendment as 
the only solution to excessive and irresponsible spending that we've 
seen go on for far too long. And yet we hear from the other side of the 
aisle and the other House--Senate majority leader called the balanced 
budget amendment a radical new idea. But how radical is it really? 
Radical? Well, 49 States in this

[[Page 16484]]

country have some form of a balanced budget amendment, and they realize 
they must abide by it to live within their means.
  A new idea? Well, indeed, Thomas Jefferson is the intellectual 
forefather of the balanced budget amendment. So we can go back some 200 
years. Back in 1798, when Jefferson wrote to Virginia Senator John 
Taylor that the solution to then-extravagant spending was a 
constitutional amendment eliminating the power of the Federal 
Government to incur debt, he went on to say:
  I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our 
Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the 
reduction of the administration of our government to the genuine 
principles of its Constitution; I mean an article, taking from the 
Federal Government the power of borrowing.
  Now, the balanced budget amendment is the Jeffersonian solution, 
therefore, to today's debt crisis. And yet, when you think about it, 
the amount of spending and overspending that they had in Jefferson's 
time pales in comparison to the reckless spending that we have today 
and the reckless and fiscal ineptitudes that we see going on in 
Washington.
  According to CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, the government 
will spend nearly--get this--$1.5 trillion this year more than it takes 
in. And if we refuse to balance our budget, as your amendment would do, 
what will happen over the next 10 years? Almost $9.5 trillion in 
additional red ink will be added to the bottom line.
  So, in conclusion, the choice I think is clear: Either we continue 
down the same road with blissful disregard of the warnings of financial 
catastrophe that we've seen, or we do what? We amend the Constitution 
to require a balanced budget and put the United States back on the road 
to sustainability and also prosperity.
  So let's make the balanced budget amendment the 28th Amendment to the 
Constitution.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey, and I like the 
sound of that 28th Amendment to the Constitution.
  Let me just say that, as I mentioned at the outset, because of the 
vote by the Congress--the House and the Senate--signed into law by the 
President, we will have a vote in both the House and Senate on a 
balanced budget amendment before the end of this year, before December 
31. And if either body passes a specific balanced budget amendment, the 
other body has to vote on the same one so that we have the greatest 
possibility that if we can reach that kind of consensus, we can 
actually send a balanced budget amendment for the first time to the 
States for ratification. It would require 38 States to ratify it. But 
as the gentleman from New Jersey just noted, 49 out of 50 States have a 
requirement in their constitution that they must balance their budgets.
  I believe that with the public supporting this by numbers northward 
of 80 percent--and it's very bipartisan support. I saw a recent poll 
that showed that 74 percent of Democrats support this, as do a great 
many Democrats here in the House. In fact, to pass a constitutional 
amendment with 290 votes, it has to be bipartisan. So we are working 
across the aisle to make sure that we build the kind of support that we 
need to pass the strongest possible amendment to our Constitution 
requiring that the government lives within its means.
  I yield to another great supporter of that concept, another new 
Member who came here to reform the way things are done here in 
Washington, DC, and who has joined us in this effort, the gentleman 
from Illinois, Congressman Randy Hultgren.
  Mr. HULTGREN. I want to thank my good friend and colleague for the 
amazing work that you've done over the years fighting for structural 
change in how Washington does its business. Thank you, Congressman 
Goodlatte, I really appreciate it. I appreciate the opportunity to be 
able to speak for a couple of minutes today.
  Mr. Speaker, since the people of the 14th Congressional District of 
Illinois sent me to be their Representative in Washington, DC, last 
year, I have fought to bring accountability and responsibility back to 
Congress. Time and again, I voted to cut spending and reduce the size 
of Federal Government, and I haven't been shy about going against and 
opposing colleagues from the Republican side of the aisle when I felt 
like they weren't doing enough to get our fiscal house back in order.
  With every vote, I'm guided by the belief that Washington, like our 
families and small businesses across the country, needs to live within 
its means. I know that the path to renewed and future prosperity lies 
through a return to fiscal sanity and not by saddling our kids and our 
grandkids with more debt.
  Our job-creating bills--that have been sent over to the Senate and 
are stuck in the Senate right now--along with less spending and less 
debt will help give small business owners and job creators the 
confidence they need to hire and expand, putting Americans back to work 
again and getting our economy moving again.
  Unfortunately, this Congress' efforts to cut spending are, on their 
own, insufficient. More importantly, any cuts we make today could be 
reversed by future Congresses. Long-term deficit reduction and spending 
restraint can only be accomplished through real structural changes to 
the way that Washington operates. And I believe, as many of you do, 
that a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution is exactly the 
change that we need.
  I have been an outspoken advocate for a balanced budget amendment 
even before being elected, and one of the first things I did after 
being sworn in was to cosponsor a balanced budget amendment. A balanced 
budget amendment would force the Federal Government to spend only what 
it takes in--a novel concept--but it is the surest path to fiscal 
sanity, less spending, and a brighter future for our kids and our 
grandkids.
  Support for the balanced budget amendment is gathering momentum in 
Congress and across this great Nation. In fact, as Congressman 
Goodlatte said, the House and Senate are required to vote on a balanced 
budget amendment very soon. But Congress has been here before. In 1995, 
they nearly passed a constitutional amendment mandating a balanced 
budget amendment but fell one vote short in the Senate. Imagine the 
difference of this Nation if that would have passed at that time than 
the situation that we're in right now. Sixteen years later, we have the 
chance to finally get it right.
  The time is now. It is our responsibility and our duty to support a 
balanced budget amendment and bring accountability back to Washington.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gentleman. I very much appreciate his 
comments and would note the fact that we have, speaking here tonight, 
Members from many corners of the country: Indiana, Alabama, Texas, 
Illinois, Mississippi, Wisconsin, New Jersey, and Virginia.

                              {time}  1620

  In fact, Members of Congress from about 46 or 47 States have 
indicated their support for at least one version of the constitutional 
amendment. If we can bring all of them together, and they can bring 
just a few more Members together, we can get to that 290 votes, because 
this is not a regional issue, this is not a partisan issue.
  This is an issue that transcends the country. It's reflected in the 
fact that this is an issue we can communicate directly with our 
constituents about, and they understand exactly what we're talking 
about because they live with the concept that they can't spend more 
than they take in year after year after year. The businesses that they 
work for, they can't spend more than they take in year after year after 
year. Local governments, State governments are all bound by this 
principle that you cannot live beyond your means. That principle should 
be enshrined in the United States Constitution.
  I yield to another Member who joins us in this effort, another new 
Member--and it's the new Members who have helped to bring this issue 
back to the fore, who really want to see a vote

[[Page 16485]]

on this for the first time in 15 years--Congressman Reid Ribble from 
Wisconsin.
  Welcome.
  Mr. RIBBLE. Thank you very much. It is an honor to come down to the 
floor of the House and work with you, Representative Goodlatte, on this 
very important issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the balanced budget 
amendment. I came down to the floor of the House this afternoon with 
some prepared comments, spent some time putting it together and wanted 
to make sure that it was right, had help from my staff, but I'm going 
to go a little bit off script today.
  As I've listened to my colleagues speak on this very important issue, 
they've covered much of what we want to say with the historical 
context, with what Thomas Jefferson, our Founder said, what Abraham 
Lincoln talked about--about government being by the people.
  Instead, I think I'm going to talk about my experience here in 
Congress. As my friend just mentioned, I'm a new Member. As a matter of 
fact, right around this day today I've been here 10 months. I've never 
served in Congress before, never served in an elected capacity before. 
I ran a small roofing company in Kaukauna, Wisconsin.
  I have to tell you that I'm struck that we're at this place in 
history. When I look at our national debt, and you look at it on a 
chart and on a curve from 1787 to 2011, from about 1787 to 1940, 1945, 
that line is almost indecipherable from zero. Then as you go on and you 
get to the late 2000s, that line begins to turn up. And now in the last 
3 years, that line is nearly vertical as our national debt continues to 
explode. And that debt has to be paid.
  I've told high school students and college students back in Wisconsin 
where I'm from that there's a reckoning coming for them. There will be 
a date and time certain that this bill will have to be paid.
  And yet, as I've worked here I've just discovered that, for whatever 
reason, whether it's partisan bickering or pure ideological 
differences, that we cannot, it seems, find agreement on controlling 
our national debt and our deficits, annual deficits.
  Just a few years ago the deficit was only $160 billion. As we heard 
from my colleague from Alabama, the last 3 years it's been over $1 
trillion each and every year. Something clearly has changed, and we 
would like to say that it's changed in our economy. I would propose to 
you, sir, that maybe it has changed in our government.
  At some point, I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, my 
friends that are Republicans and Democrats alike, it is time to put the 
sword down. We cannot, in fact, Mr. Speaker, we must not allow this 
type of spending to continue so that our children, my grandchildren, 
your children and grandchildren, will have to pay this bill, a bill 
that they did not make and a bill that they should not owe.
  So I stand before you today challenging my colleagues to consider a 
better path forward, one that we use in our families, one that we use 
in our businesses, one that 49 States use in their State governments, 
and that is a balanced budget amendment to the United States 
Constitution.
  Just the other day I was standing right over where my colleague was 
and is standing right now, and I had a copy of the Internal Revenue 
Code. It's nearly 10,000 pages of fine print. An amendment to the 
Constitution will be just a few words, and it's a simple thing.
  But most importantly, the amendment to the Constitution that would 
call for a balanced budget allows the American people, not just through 
their Representatives here in Congress, which we clearly have seen is 
not going to solve the problem, but allows the American people to 
finally have a say through the ratification process.
  I had a telephone town hall recently, Mr. Speaker, with 15,000 
Americans on the line. I did a poll and I asked them, how many of you 
would support a balanced budget amendment to the United States 
Constitution requiring the government to live within its means? Over 80 
percent of those respondents said that they would support this.
  I want you to know, Mr. Speaker, that millions of families and 
businesses every day live under the constraint of a balanced budget. As 
a father, as a former small business owner, and now as a Member of 
Congress, I have a different perspective on this whole thing, and the 
perspective is that we must, must move forward with this.
  As a father, I tried to teach my children the value of hard work, the 
importance of saving for the future and not spending more than they 
earn. As a business owner, I operated my company that same way. And 
now, as a Member of Congress, I recognize that these ideas that many of 
us, I would dare say the majority of Americans, hold true, is just as 
good for their government. And so if a balanced budget in your family, 
in your business, in your church and in your community and your State 
makes sense, it clearly makes sense here.
  The reckless spending will never stop, I believe, without it. There 
will neither be the political will nor the courage to do so. Since 
Washington has proven itself incapable of doing this job, it's time 
that we let the people, the citizens of America have a voice so that 
they can force their government to act responsibly.
  I call on my colleagues to pass a balanced budget amendment to the 
United States Constitution through this Chamber, the United States 
Senate, and then send it back to the people, where they will finally 
have their voice heard.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gentleman for his comments.
  As I indicated earlier, this is an issue that has to have a 
bipartisan solution. It simply is not possible to pass constitutional 
amendments that require two-thirds of the House, or 290 Members, and 
two-thirds of the Senate, 67 Members, without Members reaching across 
the aisle and working together to come up with language that is 
agreeable and can be supported on both sides of the aisle.
  And quite frankly, the nature of the problem that we are confronted 
with is one that past Congresses controlled by both parties, Presidents 
of both parties have contributed to, and the solution is going to have 
to require also that same kind of bipartisan working it out on a year-
to-year basis balancing the budget.
  It won't be easy. There will be tremendous differences of opinion 
about whether we should do this by cutting spending or raising 
revenues, or doing other things that can grow our economy and cause 
more revenues to come in. But it cannot get to the first stage of 
having future Congresses live by this without it being bipartisan. 
That's why I'm so pleased that so many members of the Democratic Party 
have signed on to support this effort. They've been led by an 
outstanding Member who has championed a balanced budget amendment for a 
long time, and that's Congressman Peter DeFazio from Oregon.
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for 
his leadership on this issue over almost a couple of decades. It's been 
a long struggle. I hope the time is here.
  I was one of 73 Democrats in 1995 to support a balanced budget 
amendment which was basically silent on the issue of whether we would 
get there with additional revenues and reforms that would raise 
revenues, or with spending cuts, or a combination of both. Ultimately, 
in the nineties, by a combination of revenue increases and reforms and 
spending cuts, we did reach a balance in the year 2000, and actually 
paid down debt. And had we passed that amendment in 1995, we wouldn't 
be looking at a $14-plus trillion mountain of debt today.
  As the gentleman before me spoke, that's not the legacy that I want 
to leave to our kids and grandkids and great-grandkids, given the 
magnitude of that debt. We have a responsibility to act, and anyone who 
is observing Washington these days can see that it's hard, it's really 
hard for Congress to come together and decide on issues that are 
extraordinarily important to our Nation.

                              {time}  1630

  We really need a little bit of forced discipline, I would say; and 
that's the

[[Page 16486]]

way I look at a balanced budget amendment, that H.J. Res. 2 would force 
us over a relatively short period of time to make very difficult 
decisions on, yes, the potential for revenue increases or spending cuts 
with virtually everything on the table to get to a mandatory balance of 
the budget within a short period of time.
  Then to begin to pay down the debt, which will take, if we aren't 
running surpluses and we merely balance the budget into the future, 
including our payments of interest and principal on the debt, it will 
be some 30 years before our country could be debt free.
  But that would at least be a point in time in which we knew that our 
grandkids and others to follow would not be inheriting that debt.
  So I'm very hopeful that when we have a vote some time, I understand, 
perhaps in the next month, that we have an opportunity to bring up what 
I believe is the version of the balanced budget amendment, most likely 
to be able to engender a majority as it did in 1995, and that would be 
H.J. Res. 2.
  With that, I thank the gentleman for the time, and I look forward to 
continuing to work with his leadership on this issue.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gentleman.
  In the next few weeks, as we anticipate a vote coming up quite soon, 
we have a lot of work to do to make sure that we are giving every 
Member of this body an opportunity to speak out for fiscal 
responsibility and not just speak but put their vote on the line and 
say, yes, we think we should send to the States an amendment to the 
Constitution to require a balanced budget.
  We are also joined by another new Member who has been a very strong 
advocate for cutting government spending and having government operate 
more efficiently and believes strongly in requiring that our government 
do what everyone else in our society has to do, and that is live within 
its means, balance its budget, and that's Congressman Marlin Stutzman 
from Indiana.
  I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Goodlatte, and thank you, Mr. Speaker, 
for the time that we can come to the floor and talk about this 
important issue.
  I think it's an opportunity for us here in Washington to do something 
that changes the direction of our fiscal condition in Washington, D.C., 
and our Federal Government.
  As we all know, the economy has been very difficult for families 
across this country in so many different ways. And people have realized 
and have made tough decisions within their own budget, whether it's a 
family budget, whether it's a business budget, and realize that the 
economy and the difficulties that we face today are forcing decisions 
to be made that are sometimes difficult, are not sometimes the choices 
that we'd like to make.
  But as the Federal Government continues to spend and spend money that 
we don't have, money that we're borrowing--40 cents for every dollar 
that we spend is borrowed money--I believe that this is a time for us 
to let the people speak, let the American people speak on an issue that 
is a principle that is so foundational for our family budgets, our 
business budgets, what should be a very basic principle for our 
government in the way that we operate, and that is a balanced budget 
amendment.
  This is a historic opportunity. It could also have historic 
consequences. I believe that if we do not rein in Federal Government 
spending and save the American Dream, we will, in effect, determine the 
future of our great country. It is just very simple, and I believe that 
as we take this time to talk about the balanced budget amendment, 
whatever version people support in this Chamber and across the Hall in 
the Senate, I believe that we have to have some basic principles, basic 
concepts that we can all agree on.
  How can we not agree on saying that every year Congress passes a 
budget it's going to be balanced? It is just common sense.
  I come from a State that has a balanced budget amendment, Indiana. 
And we have a balanced budget. And now I know the temptations that have 
come across the State legislature in Indiana to pass budgets that are 
out of balance.
  But if we have that anchor here in Washington that says we have to 
pass a balanced budget, that we cannot continue to borrow and spend, 
that is what's going to keep Washington in check.
  Our Constitution is the bedrock of our experiment in self-government. 
It is a remarkable document. Libraries have been written on its 
importance and its legal application, but we cannot forget that the 
wisdom our Founding Fathers built in the Constitution is timeless and 
they're very simple truths.
  People give the government its power is one of those. Government 
exists to protect our God-given rights. Men are not perfect, so neither 
is our government. So it must be limited, checked, and balanced.
  Our great Nation rests on these principles. If we still believe in 
those principles, we must recognize another simple but profound truth: 
good government must live within its means.
  So that's why I believe the balanced budget amendment to our 
Constitution is crucial at this time. When we face $15 trillion of 
debt, we're handing off and saddling our children and every person in 
this country $48,000 of debt per individual. Unemployment has held 
steady at historic high rates. Confidence is declining, and Washington, 
like a spoiled child, continues to talk about tax increases and 
stimulus programs that just do not work.
  I believe we owe it to our generation, to future generations, to pass 
a balanced budget amendment to our Constitution that requires the 
Federal Government to live within its means just like every American 
family and just like businesses across this country that are going to 
move this economy forward.
  I thank the gentleman from Virginia for his efforts with the balanced 
budget amendment, and I am proud to stand here today and support it; 
and I believe this is a great opportunity for Congress to stand with 
the American people. This is our opportunity, and we must not fail.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gentleman.
  I have to say that we've seen support from all across the country, 
from east coast States like New Jersey and Virginia all the way to the 
west coast to Oregon. We've heard from Members of both parties, we've 
heard from Members from States along the Canadian border, and Members 
from States on the gulf coast.
  This amendment has broad, broad support in the Congress, but it has a 
high hill to climb in needing 290 Members to vote for it. We're 
continuing to work to find that support. It's not a new idea. It's been 
around for almost as long as our Constitution.
  Thomas Jefferson has been cited, and I'll read that again here. He 
said, ``I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our 
Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the 
reduction of the administration of our government. I mean an additional 
article taking from the Federal Government the power of borrowing.'' He 
said that in 1798. That's not the only thing he said.
  Later in his life he said, ``There does not exist an engine so 
corruptive of the government and so demoralizing of the Nation as a 
public debt. It will bring on us more ruin at home than all the enemies 
from abroad against whom this Army and Navy are to protect us.'' Thomas 
Jefferson said that in 1821.
  And about our future generations, which several Members have 
commented on here tonight, Thomas Jefferson said in 1789, the year that 
our Constitution went into effect, ``Then I say, the Earth belongs to 
each of these generations during its course fully, and in its own 
right. The second generation receives it clear of the debts and 
encumbrances of the first, the third of the second, and so on. For if 
the first could charge it with a debt, then the Earth would belong to 
the dead and not to the living generation.''
  Thomas Jefferson wrote that to James Madison in 1789, and how 
prescient was that as our new Nation was

[[Page 16487]]

starting work under a new Constitution that he would observe that we 
are where we are today where we are passing on to future generations 
debt that is unsustainable.
  How ironic it is that we borrow money today to pay for programs today 
and put that burden on the backs of our children and grandchildren and 
those not yet even born with the likelihood that if we do not change 
from this course, we will find that those very children and 
grandchildren will not have these programs when they need to depend 
upon it. They will only have the debt.

                              {time}  1640

  This is what Thomas Jefferson meant when he said the Earth would 
belong to the dead and not to the living.
  Finally, let me give you one more quote:
  ``To preserve the independence of the people, we must not let our 
rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between 
economy and liberty or profusion and servitude.''
  Mr. ROKITA. Just a quick note to the gentleman from Virginia.
  As we're talking about ``why this hill''--and I think you mentioned 
the hill being so high and so hard to climb--there might be people at 
home watching right now, maybe even some in this Chamber right now, who 
are wondering: Why would this be so difficult? We had others come up 
and say they had a telephone town hall where over 80 percent of their 
constituents were in favor of this. Why is this so hard?
  We have to think of it this way:
  There are two groups of constituents, and we can't appease both sets 
all the time. There is a constituency that's the here and now that will 
ensure that, if we do things they want, they'll give us another 
election; they'll let us serve longer. Yet there is another 
constituency that doesn't even exist yet. No matter what we do, we 
won't be around for them to reward us. I would just suggest that 
everyone here in this House of Representatives serve that latter 
constituency: our kids, our grandkids, those who don't even exist yet. 
Vote for them to make sure that we keep the Republic.
  For those of you who are watching, make sure you tell your 
Representatives, Hey, I want you to vote, not for me, not so that I can 
have more on my plate now; I want you to vote for our future.
  If the people of this country demand that of their Representatives 
and their Senators, we will keep the Republic as Franklin demanded.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, that's an excellent note on which to 
close.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana and everyone else who has 
participated and the other gentleman from Indiana.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Palazzo). Members are reminded to 
address the Chair and not the viewing audience.

                          ____________________