All 47 Senate Republicans Co-sponsor Balanced Budget Amendment
By Noel Sheppard | March 31, 2011 | 16:54
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced moments ago that all 47 Senate Republicans co-sponsored a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
As Human Events reported Thursday:
The key provisions of the new balanced budget amendment (BBA) are: Congress must pass a balanced budget; the President has to submit a balanced budget; spending is capped at 18% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP); “supermajority” vote (two-thirds of House and Senate) to raise taxes; and “new supermajority” vote (three-fifths of House and Senate) to raise the debt ceiling.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
That seems like a reasonable bill
Submitted by CobraMan on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 5:12pm.
That seems like a reasonable bill. It doesn't even conflict with the Constitutional requirement of spending bills originating in the House, as it's not a spending bill at all. I wonder how the democrats will frame their arguments against it when they refuse to pass it. My only concern is the Republican's offering of this as a concession for agreeing to raise the debt limit once again.
Oh, and it's not 47 Republicans who cosponsored it as claimed, it's only 33 who support it at this point. "So far, the Republicans have at least 33 members supporting the new BBA. Cornyn said that he and others are making calls this week to line up the others to support it. He expects to have all 47 Republicans in support by next week, and then will start outreach to the Senate Democrats." That's from the link that Noel provided. I haven't seen any thing yet that indicates who actually sponsored or cosponsored the bill.
On Edit: Noel here's the link to the latest article with the 47 sponsor info. It's quite a detailed article.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
8) Effective Date: Becomes
Submitted by Dave. on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 9:16pm.
8) Effective Date: Becomes effective the fifth fiscal year after ratification.
That's too long.
We don't have five years.
It's just too bad we didn't put more conservative fannies in the Senate last November, because given the current make-up of that legislative body, this thing has about as much chance off passing as the FairTax, which is to say it doesn't have a snow ball's chance in Hell.
It will, however, be interesting to see which repub senators vote against it, if Harry allows it to come up for a vote, I mean.
-Dave
47 may 'sponsor' the bill,
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 5:42pm.
47 may 'sponsor' the bill, but how many are willing to negotiate another 600 billion in new spending to appease the democrats so they won't get too much bad press?
"The problem with Americas education system. http://gjresult.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1375
Get OUR representatives out of the sewer! http://gjresult.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1379
Dont like it
Submitted by Boudin on Thu, 03/31/2011 - 9:25pm.
First of all, 18% is too much and they wont cut spending to balance the budget, they will "begrudgingly" raise Taxes, then blame the Right.
These Rupub in the Senate are dumb as dirt! They never learn just what unethical scumbags the libtards are.
18% is the spending cap
Submitted by Denny Crane on Fri, 04/01/2011 - 2:48am.
And that is key to this. Without that cap, a BBA is just something that the dems can use to justify tax increases.
We Are The 53%