Balanced budget amendment:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52020805/GOP-Balanced-Budget-Amendment-Text

It seems like a reasonable amendment, but I have some reservations:

1) I am not sure I like a law that talks about 'results', and not actions. Basically, what exactly is against the law? If the total outlays are greater than the total receipts.. Who has violated the law? And if Congress does not 'remedy' the situation, then are they violating the law? Yes, the budget is is violation of the law.. Does this mean that the last budget to pass is rejected? Even if it was some other circumstance that caused the situation?

Normally A law should say what prohibited, what is allowed, and what someone or some body shall do. Or even a law dealing with something physical. Then each action or item can be scrutinized as being lawful or unlawful. Reality can not be lawful or unlawful. So when someone measures the outlays and receipts, and determines that it violates the Balanced Budget Amendment.. Well.. Can you get rid of the results? Was the conclusion, or the measurement unlawful?

I'm sure congress will determine what is lawful and unlawful, or the actual remedies when the situation arises. But if they don't? If someone finds a loophole? Is it illegal for congress to *not* pass laws that implement the requirements of the amendment?

2) I don't like numbers in the constitution unless they are based on some principle. 18% is clearly arbitrary. This should be a congressional decision.

3) Is there any reason that a spending limit should be in the same amendment as a Balanced Budget requirement?

4) Why does the President propose a budget. Why is this a requirement. What happens if Congress spends money?

5) Why is a modification to how one raises taxes in this bill?

6) Why should the constitution care if it is the aggregate revenue that is increased? Again, it shouldn't be working with a result. It should only be working with the action. In this case, the raising of the tax rate. What if some bill were to pass that because of its restrictions, cases people to do something that raises tax revenue. Is that particular bill illegal even though it wasn't passed by a 2/3's majority?

7) How does this amendment deal with Bills that increase inflation? If this causes revenue increases, is it illegal? This may be the best part of the amendment!

Ok, I change my mind. It is a horrific amendment. It does too much, and isn't principled enough. Shame on the republicans, including good people such as Ron and Rand Paul, for supporting this.