Mr. President, as my colleagues know, we have all been elected to the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000021800030"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000021900014"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Senate to make the difficult policy decisions that confront our <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000021800051"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000022900055"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal Government. Every day on the Senate floor, we engage in decisionmaking that is the essence of the legislative process.<p>
Some decisions that come before the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000021900014"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000022900138"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Senate are rather commonplace, such as how much to spend on scientific research or whether we will build and maintain new highways or ports. Other decisions are much more profound, such as who will become the next Supreme Court Justice, or whether or not our Nation will go to war.<p>
No decision a Senator makes it more profound than our vote on an amendment to the Constitution. Amending the Constitution is an extraordinary <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022000049"></a><a href="../viewdata/l.htm#_ICONOVEX_LEGISLATIVEACTION"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>legislative action that has occurred only a few times in our <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022000072"></a><a href="../viewdata/n.htm#_ICONOVEX_NATIONSHISTORY"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Nation's history.<p>
The first 10 amendments, which we know as the Bill of Rights, were proposed and ratified almost immediately after the Constitution itself. In the next 200 years, only 16 amendments were proposed by Congress and ratified by the States.<p>
This experience tells us that the balance and compromise crafted during the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022200026"></a><a href="../viewdata/c.htm#_ICONOVEX_CONSTITUTIONALCONVENTION"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Constitutional Convention has served us very well. We are governed by a remarkably resilient document, and it is a tribute to our Founding Fathers that the Constitution has been amended so infrequently.<p>
I am deeply concerned that the amendment we are now considering will upset the delicate balance of power forged during the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022300055"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000022400052"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget amendment would transfer fundamental spending and <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022300072"></a><a href="../viewdata/t.htm#_ICONOVEX_TAXINGAUTHORITY"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>taxing authority from Congress to the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022300085"></a><a href="../viewdata/e.htm#_ICONOVEX_EXECUTIVEBRANCH"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>executive branch. By this amendment, we would unravel mechanisms that our <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022300110"></a><a href="../viewdata/f.htm#_ICONOVEX_FOUNDINGFATHERS"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Founding Fathers delicately weaved into the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022300123"></a><a href="../viewdata/c.htm#_ICONOVEX_CONSTITUTIONFABRICOF"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>fabric of the Constitution to keep the excesses of the executive, judicial, and <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022300152"></a><a href="../viewdata/l.htm#_ICONOVEX_LEGISLATIVEBRANCHES"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>legislative branches in check. I genuinely fear that the balanced budget amendment would give rise to an imperial Presidency. And let us remember that domination by the Executive is what caused us to abandon our relationship with England and establish a great democracy.<p>
During hearings convened by House and <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022400014"></a><a href="../viewdata/s.htm#_ICONOVEX_SENATECOMMITTEES"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Senate committees, many professors of law and learned constitutional scholars expressed well-founded concerns that, if ratified, the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022400052"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000022800047"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget amendment would permit the President to impose taxes or fees in order to enforce the amendment. It would also implicitly or explicitly repeal the impoundment control measures contained in the 1974 Budget Act.<p>
The notion that the Executive should be allowed to impose taxes without the concurrence of Congress is a radical proposition. It violates the constitutional principle that Congress alone should have the power to lay and collect taxes.<p>
Our Constitution is a remarkable document. As ratified by the States, its fundamental elements are now familiar to us all: A government divided into three parts--each part separate and distinct--and each armed with tools to defend against the excesses of the other.<p>
Yes, our Constitution has been amended over the years. We have 10 amendments that set forth fundamental rights guaranteed to all. We have a number of housekeeping amendments which establish the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022700067"></a><a href="../viewdata/e.htm#_ICONOVEX_ELECTORALCOLLEGE"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>electoral college, provide for the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022700079"></a><a href="../viewdata/s.htm#_ICONOVEX_SENATORSELECTIONOF"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>election of Senators by popular vote, and establish an orderly process in the event of the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022700113"></a><a href="../viewdata/p.htm#_ICONOVEX_PRESIDENTDEATHOF"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>death of the President. We have amendments that secure freedom and promote universal suffrage, such as the 13th, ending slavery; 14th, due process, equal protection; 15th, end discrimination; and the 19th and 26th amendments, vote for women and 18-year-olds.<p>
But none of these amendments reorders the fundamental structure of power and authority as would occur under the balanced budget amendment. The <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022800047"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000023000029"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget amendment would tilt the balance of power heavily in favor of the Executive, and, as I said earlier, promote an imperial Presidency.<p>
There are those who argue that a balanced budget amendment is a good idea. After all, if families can balance their budgets, why cannot the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022900055"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000022900072"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal Government? Under the proposed amendment, the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022900072"></a><a href="bbs10.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000025700125"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal Government would be required to balance its <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022900089"></a><a href="../viewdata/b.htm#_ICONOVEX_BUDGETEVERYYEAR"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>budget every year. The only time a deficit could occur would be during time of war, or when three-fifths of the House and <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022900138"></a><a href="bbs10.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000024800046"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Senate agree. While it sounds easy, there remains a glaring problem with such a simplistic approach to reducing the Nation's debt. What programs would <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022900190"></a><a href="../viewdata/c.htm#_ICONOVEX_CONGRESSCUT"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Congress cut to achieve a <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022900201"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000023100067"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget by the year 2002, the date on which the amendment would go into effect? What <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000022900238"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000023200138"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal agencies would have their budgets<p>
slashed in order to help the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023000014"></a><a href="../viewdata/f.htm#_ICONOVEX_FEDERALGOVERNMENTMEET"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal Government meet the requirements of the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023000029"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000023200063"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget amendment?<p>
Estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office call for spending cuts totaling $1.5 trillion by the year 2002. <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023100039"></a><a href="../viewdata/c.htm#_ICONOVEX_CBO"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>CBO also predicts that if <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023100050"></a><a href="bbs11.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000029200127"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Social Security and defense are exempted from the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023100067"></a><a href="bbs11.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000029200168"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget numbers then all other <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023100080"></a><a href="../viewdata/f.htm#_ICONOVEX_FEDERALPROGRAMS"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal programs would be cut across the board by 30 percent. That of course, is assuming that all cuts are equal and that partisanship is left out of the mix.<p>
Although I wholeheartedly support and endorse efforts to balance the Federal budget, I am greatly concerned that the $1.5 trillion in spending cuts needed to meet the goals of a <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023200063"></a><a href="bbs10.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000024800057"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget amendment by the year 2002 would have a devastating impact on a wide segment of our population. Supporters of the resolution fail to explain where these tremendous budget cuts would fall. Without assurances that <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023200138"></a><a href="bbs10.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000025800048"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal agencies and programs would be equitably affected, such a plan is unworkable.<p>
I strongly back Democratic leader <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023300012"></a><a href="../viewdata/d.htm#_ICONOVEX_DASCHLESAMENDMENT"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Daschle</b>'s amendment that would require Congress to pass an honest, detailed plan to balance the budget before the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023300053"></a><a href="../viewdata/c.htm#_ICONOVEX_CONSTITUTIONALAMENDMENTBALANCEDBUDGET"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>balanced budget constitutional amendment goes to States for ratification. It is irresponsible for us to vote on an amendment requiring a balanced budget which would necessitate draconian budget cuts without knowing what we would be cutting and how. We need to know. The American people have the right to know.<p>
Let me mention a few more aspects of this balanced budget amendment that concern me. A <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023400035"></a><a href="bbs14.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000034300088"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>constitutional amendment to balance the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023400046"></a><a href="bbs13.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000032000012"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Federal budget could damage the economy more than strengthen it. Greater amounts of <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023400074"></a><a href="../viewdata/d.htm#_ICONOVEX_DEFICITCUTTING"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>deficit cutting would be required in periods of slow growth than in times of rapid growth--an action which economists predict would result in more frequent and deeper recessions.<p>
Such an amendment could also limit <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023500014"></a><a href="../viewdata/i.htm#_ICONOVEX_INVESTMENTSPUBLIC"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>public investments that are critical to long-term growth because the amendment makes no distinction between <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023500045"></a><a href="bbs09.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000023500086"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>investments such as education and training and early intervention programs for children, and other types of government spending. These <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023500086"></a><a href="../viewdata/i.htm#_ICONOVEX_INVESTMENTS"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>investments are necessary to ensure the <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023500099"></a><a href="../viewdata/n.htm#_ICONOVEX_NATIONSCOMPETITIVENESS"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>Nation's competitiveness and help the economy grow.<p>
Because the amendment calls for a balanced budget every year, regardless of whether economic growth is strong or weak, larger spending cuts or <a name="_ICONOVEX_00000023600050"></a><a href="bbs18.htm#_ICONOVEX_00000039200061"><img src="../viewdata/default5.gif" alt="@" border="0"></a>tax increases would be needed in periods of slow growth than in times of rapid growth, further exacerbating an already crippled economy.<p>
Mr. President, I know we will have ample time to debate this issue further, and I look forward to the ensuing debate.<p></body>
