Balanced Budget Amendment Fails in House
Email
J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo
The House today rejected a move to amend the U.S. Constitution with a Balanced Budget Amendment. The vote of 261-165 fell 23 votes short of passage, which required a two-thirds majority.
Four Republicans, Reps. Paul Ryan, David Dreier, Justin Amash and Louie Gohmert, voted with the majority of Democrats to oppose the bill.
The last time the House voted on a Balanced Budget amendment, in 1995, the measure received more than 300 votes but fell one vote short in the Senate of becoming law. Today it wasn’t even close, with just 25 Democrats supporting the GOP-favored measure.
Afterwards, House Speaker John Boehner issued a written statement where he blasted Democrats for passing up an opportunity to get the economy back in order.
“It’s unfortunate that Democrats still don’t recognize the urgency of stopping Washington’s job-crushing spending binge, and it’s disappointing that a president who says ‘we can’t wait’ to take action on jobs is doing just that: waiting, riding things out until the election, and skipping opportunities to work together with Republicans to create a better environment for job growth,” Boehner, R-Ohio, stated. “The American people are still asking the question, ‘where are the jobs?’ But the Democrats running Washington just aren’t listening.”
Democrats opposed the measure because they said it wouldn’t solve the nation’s fiscal problems.
“Here we go again debating legislation that will not create jobs. In fact, according to experts, enactment of this proposed amendment to our constitution would destroy 15 million jobs, double the unemployment rate, cause the economy to shrink by 17 percent,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said. “”Despite the claims of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, that this…is a clean balanced budget amendment. It is not.”
Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is widely respected among Republicans on budget issues and chairs the House Budget Committee. But he voted against the amendment supported by his party leadership.
“I’m concerned that this version will lead to a much bigger government fueled by more taxes,” Ryan said in a statement following the vote. “Spending is the problem, yet this version of the BBA makes it more likely taxes will be raised, government will grow, and economic freedom will be diminished. Without a limit on government spending, I cannot support this Amendment.”
Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., who is seeking the GOP nomination for president, returned to the Capitol to cast a rare vote in favor of the amendment. The other House lawmaker seeking the Republican nomination, Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, missed today’s vote.
One element of the bipartisan deal to increase the debt limit last summer was to guarantee a vote in both chambers of Congress on the BBA. The Senate has not yet announced when it might take up the measure, although it is not expected to pass there either.
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
spending is the problem. i work seven days a week 90 pct of the year because i never want to poor like my parents were.i find it odd that working people in this country pay through the nose to provide for the slackers and get nothing butt grief from the slackers. if feel in many instances if people poured their heart and souls into there work they would nt have been the first to be laid off. there are ten million things to do seven days a week to earn a living. first thing to do is to quit relying on a democrat to save your bacon while they line their pockets like pelosi.
Posted by: catman | November 18, 2011, 4:43 pm 4:43 pm
In times of peace and prosperity we should balance the budget, every chance we get. But the USA must have the flexibility to borrow, it is in our national security interest.
Imagine if we had a balanced budget amendment during WWII. We would have lost the war and we would be speaking Japanese and/or German. Our debt after the war was some 120% of GDP, that is equivalent to approx $40 trillion in today’s value. Right now we are not even half of that.
Or going to Iraq and Afghanistan – there would be no money to take the fight to other countries and support our troops.
Imagine we had a balanced budget amendment during the building of the Hoover Dam or the interstates. Never would have happened as the govt would not be able to borrow the money to guarantee the loans for the private companies. That’s right, it was private companies that built these projects, not the govt. The govt provided the means for private companies to take on massive projects and hire workers.
The USA needs to rebuild her infrastructure which will require lots of money. The govt will be the only source of providing loans and guarantees to rebuild and hire employees for the private companies.
No private company has the ability or resources to take on projects like these. It was the govt that provided the financing to get these projects started and completed. It was the govt that provided the means for these private employers to hire employees.
Borrowing money for investments is always a risk. Borrowing money for military operations has been going on since the Continental Congress authorized the printing of ‘Continental Dollars” to fund the revolutionary war. The country was founded in debt.
Korea, Truman borrowed money. Viet Nam, Eisenhower started pumping money and putting US boots in a combat zone with borrowed money. Reagan’s military thrust into Panama and Grenada, borrowed money. Bush (both of them) in Iraq, borrowed money.
It is a double edged sword. We must retain the ability to borrow money and we must show restraint on spending money.
Posted by: raggmopp | November 18, 2011, 5:03 pm 5:03 pm
So ABC mentions the fact that four Republicans voted against passage but does not report that TWENTY FIVE Democrats voted with the Republicans or provide quotes from them like they did Rep. Ryan as to why they voted for the Amendment…Nice Bias ABC!!!
Posted by: Sean | November 18, 2011, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm
House Speaker John Boehner issued a written statement where he blasted Democrats for passing up an opportunity to get the economy back in order. Seriously???!!! And just how many times has the GOP passed up an opportunity to get the economy back in order????!! Shut Up Boehner!!!
Posted by: Karen | November 18, 2011, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm
There you have it folks. 5 Republicans and 236 of Democrats don’t care to have a balanced budget.
Posted by: newcountryman | November 18, 2011, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm
Gee, imagine the Democrat party voting for an amendment that (if ratified) would force the government to spend no more than it takes in. You can’t buy votes with expensive promises. This is explains why the Democrats oppose it and, less a nominal amount for wars, why we have $15 TRILLION of debt. Dems will NEVER vote for spending discipline. It would simply extinguish any need for their existence.
Posted by: s | November 18, 2011, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
What’s sad about this measure is that is doesn’t stop spending…what it does is say we have a balanced budget, but does not force spending cuts. Therefore, to get a balanced budget, taxes have to be raised. Everyone of the politicians who voted FOR this bill should be FIRED!!
Posted by: RalphF | November 18, 2011, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
This is good because it will mean Obama will be re-elected in 2012. The American people are against the GOP “plan” and they want the super rich to be taxed at rates of the Reagon era. But the GOP is being held hostage by the anti-tax right wing GOP guy. The middle class will not vote for the GOP candidate next year, nor will the poor. And even some of the wealthy won’t vote for the GOP candidate. That leaves the FOX Right Wing News employees, the racists, the greedy, and the anti-government t-baggers. It’s all good for Obama and the American people in next year’s election.
Posted by: usa8888 | November 18, 2011, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
There you haveit folks, 5 Republicans and 236 Democrats don’t want to balance the budget by killing the middle-class.
Posted by: arryandan | November 18, 2011, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm
“There you haveit folks, 5 Republicans and 236 Democrats don’t want to balance the budget by killing the middle-class.” ————— Baloney. The deficit will suck the lifeblood out of the middle class. Thanks again dems!
Posted by: Logicsgood5 | November 18, 2011, 7:59 pm 7:59 pm
Aren’t you all as fed up as me with the rhetoric? Republicans say “It’s the fault of the Democrats” while Democrats say “It’s the fault of the Republicans”. Read this article again and find where ANY of these elected losers tell us the action they’ll take to get the economy back on track. Neither of the parties benefit by doing anything right. If things worked, they’d be it of jobs. So they show up and spout rhetoric at one another, go not vote on a bogus bill that bleeds Americans whether it passes or not, and live to schlepp their cheap wares another day. VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS FOR THE NEXT 5 CYCLES!!
Posted by: Ed Norton | November 18, 2011, 9:07 pm 9:07 pm
Wouldn’t it be awesome if an asteroid large enough to explode in our atmosphere that it would have an enormous EMP to knock out everything in this country. Anyone ever watch Escape From LA, the final scene, the EMP goes and he lights a match.
THAT will curb this nations spending problems.
Posted by: realist | November 19, 2011, 8:07 am 8:07 am
“It’s unfortunate that Democrats still don’t recognize the urgency of stopping Washington’s job-crushing spending binge…” Boehner said.
Someone needs to tell this moron that ALL spending bills must, by law, originate in the HOUSE. The House where Boehner is the leader. What an idiotic statement for him to make…..
Posted by: Searambler | November 19, 2011, 9:51 am 9:51 am
So ABC mentions the fact that four Republicans voted against passage but does not report that TWENTY FIVE Democrats voted with the Republicans…..
Posted by: Sean | November 18, 2011, 5:05 pm.
Ummmm, third paragraph, second sentence. Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing when you actually bother to read the article………..
Posted by: Searambler | November 19, 2011, 9:53 am 9:53 am
A Balanced Budget Amendment doesn’t create any jobs, nor does it create the climate for producing jobs. It WOULD add to the unemployment numbers. And it COULD also be used to raise taxes. There are three ways to balance the budget: cut spending, raise taxes, or a combination of both. Unless the proposal specified that the budget can ONLY be balanced with spending cuts, then tax increases are on the table. Once again Republicans are the short-sighted, myopic, and completely useless Party. Republican politicians are complete morons to push for – and waste time on – something like this during a weak economy. Complete frikkin’ morons………..
Posted by: Searambler | November 19, 2011, 10:01 am 10:01 am
The deficit will suck the lifeblood out of the middle class.
Posted by: Logicsgood5 | November 18, 2011, 7:59 pm.
And exactly HOW does the deficit do this? Please be specific. And then please explain how increasing unemployment among the Middle Class by several million, as this proposal would surely do, HELPS the Middle Class.
Posted by: Searambler | November 19, 2011, 10:06 am 10:06 am
I am stunned at how quickly the GOP has dropped the “Balanced Budget” amendment when they became the all-out majority in 2001, then, how quickly they want to adopt a new one. They have litereally tried every underhanded trick in the book to spend money during their reign, and payback money during the Democrat’s. ANSWER THIS GOP, if you were that worried about spending, why did you vote yourselves 36 payraises between 2001, and 2007?
Posted by: arryandan | November 21, 2011, 12:04 pm 12:04 pm
Above, one of the posters makes the comment that, “We are $15 T in debt, Dems don’t understand curbing your expenses”. DUH, 12.5 trillion of that was spent by……GUESS WHO? Their initials start with GOP, still don’t know who is spending all the money? $5.8 T from 2001, to 2007. Give up? The SAME people trying to convince you that Dems are spending too much.
Posted by: arryandan | November 21, 2011, 1:51 pm 1:51 pm
Arryandan – exactly – the republicans are only Fiscal Conservatives when they are NOT the ones in total control of Congress and the WH. When they were in control, they spent like they had an unlimited credit card at Tiffany’s.
Posted by: pksk531 | November 21, 2011, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm