Posted on 07/28/2011 6:10:42 AM PDT by Veritas_et_libertas
When you write a constitutional amendment, the devil is in the details.
Cut, Cap, and Balance prescribed some details for a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA). But those details were poorly thought-out, and might have given America a devil of a problem.
Fortunately, Senate liberalstoo short-term greedy to recognize their own long-term political interestdefeated Cut, Cap, and Balance. As a result, we dodged a bullet we had unwittingly fired at ourselves.
Let me make it clear that I believe in balanced budgets, and would like to see a balanced budget requirement in the U.S. Constitution. And Ive proved my bona fides: For many years I conspicuously led citizen efforts in Montana to limit taxes and spendingand did so at enormous personal and professional cost. However, years ago, when researching the subject of TELs (tax and expenditure limitations), I learned that some measures can do more harm than good. In other words, they can backfire. Whether a limitation works as intended or backfires depends largely on how you write it.
The authors of the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill were well intentioned, but in the BBA part of the bill, they made some potential mistakes.
First: The bill required that before the debt limit could be increased, Congress must propose a BBA meeting several requirements. But in doing so, the authors of the bill unwittingly invited the courts to strike down any BBA so proposed.
ctnd...
(Excerpt) Read more at constitution.i2i.org ...
I agree the “metaphor” was great. hahaha.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.