National Center for Policy Analysis

COMMENTARY

Friday, December 6, 1996

---

SHOULD WE SUPPORT THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT?

SYNDICATED COLUMNIST TONY SNOW: NO

In theory, the balanced budget amendment is a good thing because it makes Congress do what it can't do on its own: live within its means. Also -- in theory -- it would curb politicians' desire to use other people's money for suspect purposes. But the law of unintended consequences could rear its head. While the amendment might force fiscal responsibility, it could also give congress a good excuse to impose sweeping new taxes or mandates that make working people pick up the tab for new programs. It would almost certainly doom major tax reform, because these changes would almost certainly generate budget deficits. Reforming entitlements would go out the window, even though Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are bankrupting the country. Thus we could go broke because of a balanced budget decree. One more thing: how can conservatives back an amendment that embodies the central tenet of modern liberalism, the idea that one can produce a better society by ordering people to do good things?

Source: Tony Snow, "Balanced budget amendment is wrong answer," Conservative Chronicle, November 27, 1996.

NCPA POLICY CHAIRMAN PETE DU PONT: YES

I hate to disagree with Tony Snow. We're usually on the same side, but not on the balanced budget amendment. To Tony, forcing a balanced budget on Congress would raise taxes, stifle the movement to cut entitlements and doom major tax reform.

They're challenging arguments. But we literally can't afford them.

In 1962 the federal budget was $100 billion. It doubled by 1971. And again by 1977. And by 1983. And by fiscal 1997. Next year the federal government will spend $240 billion just to pay the interest on the federal debt.

A child born this year will have to pay $187,000 in taxes to pay his share of the debt.

Because of the federal deficit's effect on families, they'll only make an average of $35,000 a year instead of the $50,500 they'd make without it.

Congress is incapable of restricting spending sufficiently over the long run without a balanced budget amendment to make them do it.

Once it's in place, we can afford tackle our other problems.

Source: Pete du Pont (National Center for Policy Analysis), essay on Radio America, December 6, 1996.