Senate Rs to Intro Toomey Balanced Budget Amendment
Freshman Sen. Pat Toomey (R.,Pa.) to introduce balanced budget amendment today with GOP brass behind him.
Senate Rs to Intro Toomey Balanced Budget Amendment
Thomas Fitzgerald, Inquirer Politics Writer
A united Senate Republicans caucus is set to introduce today a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution written by freshman Sen.Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, who blended competing proposals into a bill that attracted wide support.
Toomey's amendment would cap federal spending at 18 percent of gross domestic product, a limit that would take effect five years after ratification. It would prohibit federal expenditures from exceeding income, and require a two-thirds majority vote of both Houses of Congress to raise taxes. (addition to clarify original post)
The requirement can be waived by a majority vote of Congress during a declared war, and a three-fifths vote during an undeclared conflict. At all other times, a two-thirds vote would be requirement to lift the 18-percent-of-GDP lid.
Toomey negotiated a hybrid of a proposal by Republicans John Cornyn of Texas and Orrin Hatch of Utah, and another one by Republcians Jon Kyl of Arizona and Mike Lee of Utah. They were scheduled to unveil the compromise two weeks ago, but the party's Senate leaders convinced them to hold off until the whole caucus could be brought aboard.
The amendment faces high hurdles - needing support from two-thirds of Congress and then ratification from 38 states to become part of the Constitution. But Toomey and other Republicans hope that it provides impetus for spending reforms tied to the upcoming showdown over lifting the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.
He and other conservatives, including Sen. Marc Rubio, the Florida Republican, have said they will not vote to raise the ceiling, which the government is fast approaching, without reforms.
Comment removed.
I like the chart showing that the Republican-backed tax cuts would actually grow the deficit.— Briancd- Nice to see Toomey doing something. Good for him.
- You dopes, this is just grandstanding on Toomey's part. He knows this will never pass but is pushing it anyway trying to paint Dems in a corner. But like Abe said, look at the deficits and see how they've been tied to Repub administrations. See the steady INCLINE during the Reagan and Bush 12 year run then a dip during Clinton's followed by, yup, you guessed it, another rise during W's 8 years. Forest for the trees fellas. This is like the Tea Party people railing against spending but taking government farming subsidies. Do as I say, not as I do politics in action!— amg
- What you say is true, which means it will never be taken seriously by Republicans... so unfortunate. Steady decline in 60s (all D presidents), little bump mid 70s (Nixon), steady rise during Reagan and both Bushes. — mcrochip
- What a nice bunch of posturing - they want to appear tough on the budget but they know that there is no chance this bill is ratified. Therefore, they can shrug their shoulders and still keep the support of their supporters - "I tried".— Murrayman
- Correction, it was Briancd not Abe that made the astute observation on the chart.— amg
- Who is Pennsylvania's other Senator again? Is it still Santorum, or is it Specter? I forget.— Mr. Smith
- Sounds like a good plan. Unfortunatly, the "tax and spend" Democrats still control the Senate and the White House and their banking buddies will lobby against this. Democrats have done NOTHING but pass business killing laws over the past 2 yrs and now they scoff at protections for real citizens.— Citizenc92
- The bankers are supporting the GOP while the Dems try to regulate the banks to prevent future financial meltdowns, and protect real citizens from predatory lending. — plugh
- This is not a balanced budget amendment, it is a spending limit of 18% GDP. Nothing in the description requires a balanced budget. Why is the GOP wasting time with things like this rather than dealing with the current budget and the impending government shutdown. They really spent the last 2 weeks tuning this and getting their party on board rather than addressing the real issues? Priorities, please.— plugh
- Comment removed.
- What's ironic is Democrats try to cheer Clinton's supposed "Balanced Budget" (which it really wasn't) yet they don't want to support a Balanced Budget Amendment....Makes no sense to me...— Citizenc92
- The difference is this is just grandstanding while the Clinton admin actually did real work. Toomey is proudly announcing he likes a balanced budget, proposing a constitutional amendment that limits spending (but does not actually require a balanced budget), and says nothing of what should be cut, what programs eliminated, to get there. The Clinton administration raised some taxes, reduced the size of government, and closed some loopholes to fix the budget. That was real. — plugh
- Yes, the Clinton administration was really interested in reducing the size of government during it's first two years when Democrats controlled Congress. haha, I will give them this: at least they saw the writing on the wall and changed course after they got smoked in teh '94 election. Liberals love revisionist history...and for good reason.— ChrisInConshy
- Plugh, your comment made me realize I was not precise enough with my post. The 18 % of GDP is a hard cap on total fed spending, and it also would require balance bet revenues and expenditures, with the emergency war exceptions if approved by Congress. I put a clarifying phrase in the original post and underlined it. Sorry for the confusion. Tom— Thomast Fitzgerald
You can reach Tom Fitzgerald at 215-854-2718 or tfitzgerald@phillynews.com.
Reach Thomas at tfitzgerald@phillynews.com.
