Home | About | Donate

5 Reasons to Reject Any Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment

5 Reasons to Reject Any Constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment

Richard Kogan

Members of Congress have proposed almost a dozen constitutional amendments this year requiring a balanced budget, all of which share serious drawbacks. Rep. Ben McAdams introduced the latest balanced budget amendment (BBA), H.J. Res. 55, and it shows both that BBAs are fundamentally flawed and that attempts to fix them invariably don’t succeed at doing that.

That’s true mainly for five reasons:

Of course with recessions we must run deficits, but some other times are important also. There are times when extra infrastructure spending will easily pay for itself with greater productivity. Also, spending to help the poor stay healthy and educated can save money in many ways in the future with healthier, more productive, less likely to be incarcerated, etc. lives.

No experts ever discuss the twenty-one million innocent people the united states has murdered using the deficit spending credit card,

We always contemplate serene experts using deficit spending to guide a benevolent government tasked with creating good green jobs for happy healthy citizens who need a growing economy in order to reach extinction more quickly,


Nobody says outlaw credit cards all together. I hope I don’t have to use one, but I want the right to have one for any emergency that may arise.

I love having a credit card, but it’s a very bad deal if one can not pay it off entirely every month.

A country that prints however much money it wants into existence doesn’t need a balanced budget. As a matter of fact, I suspect it can’t have a balanced budget, since all the currency is created out of thin air to start with - a “budget” is meaningless.

To say a budget is meaningless is not quite correct. People need to have faith in the currency. If printing and spending get extremely high then people lose faith in the currency and inflation rises.