This Bill doesn't go far enough.

[roysoldboy]

Originally Posted by Memphis1979

When necessary, which is Washington speak is all the time.

So you support a meaningless amendment?

And to be technical, all budgets are balanced, with more debt. Thats the kicker, and thats why the man I quoted above said its the stupidest amendment ever proposed.

You and the establishment figures really believe what you say. Necessary to us means in case of a crisis like a war or a depression, or something like that. Your crap about necessary being all the time is just more giving in to the use of pork to get votes which is so important to the establishment pols.

Get your hands on the amendment and read it. Maybe I am wrong but I will stick with the man. Have you seen where I told JTG that Huelskamp says that 49 states have amendments or laws that require balanced budgets so surely 3/4 of them would vote in favor. Also he has said many times, lately, that he is sure that there are enough members in both houses to propose this amendment if Dirty Harry will allow the Senate to vote on it. Maybe Speaker of the House Boehner won't allow it either. Establishment figures happen to be many besides those two.

[Memphis1979]

Originally Posted by roysoldboy

You and the establishment figures really believe what you say. Necessary to us means in case of a crisis like a war or a depression, or something like that. Your crap about necessary being all the time is just more giving in to the use of pork to get votes which is so important to the establishment pols.

Get your hands on the amendment and read it. Maybe I am wrong but I will stick with the man. Have you seen where I told JTG that Huelskamp says that 49 states have amendments or laws that require balanced budgets so surely 3/4 of them would vote in favor. Also he has said many times, lately, that he is sure that there are enough members in both houses to propose this amendment if Dirty Harry will allow the Senate to vote on it. Maybe Speaker of the House Boehner won't allow it either. Establishment figures happen to be many besides those two.

If I feel that spending is necessary, I write my congress men and women, and the President and say "I think this, that, and the other should be included in the budget, but this, that and this other should not be"

Thats how I tell congress I want a balanced budget. If legislatures from Nebraska want to pass a budget that doesn't fit those guidelines, that is their choice, and this is a some what a majority rule country.

I can't tell other states what to do, and what not to do.

Again, if you want a balanced budget, tell your congressmen. A meaningless bill that would be circumvented for "needed spending" every year is stupid.

Besides all of that, it didn't pass the Senate, even some Republicans voted against it, and getting 3/4's of states to pass it is impossible.

[Donna-501]

Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy

You are never going to get 3/4 of the state legislatures in this country to pass a balance budget amendment. You are never going to get 2/3 of the House of Sensate to agree to this measure in the current Congress either.

The entire measure is a complete waste of time and it's actually harmful in a time of national crisis. The United States would have literally fought World War II with one hand behind its back if there was a balanced budget amendment.

Exactly!

[Donna-501]

Originally Posted by roysoldboy

I see that you know next to nothing about this proposed amendment but are willing to allow me to hold you up to some ridicule.

Ok, in a phone town hall the other night Huelskamp replied to a question about crises by saying that it has words that allow the Congress to do what might be needed in case of a crisis or more than one at a time.

Also, Huelskamp says that 49 states have amendments or laws that require balanced budgets. Surely those states wouldn't mind seeing the national government having a lie rule. He also says that he is sure of at least 2/3 of the Congress men being in favor of it. Now I am not sure that all of those have the guts to vote against the establishment people in their party since so many proved the other day that they could be "had" by the establishment Republicans (mostly RINOs) by changing their votes. The Tea Party people stayed with what they were elected to do, though.

You, however, are sure that if somehow this question comes to a vote it will go down. Of course, the chances it will happen are very small since Dirty Harry Reid ducked it the other day. You know Reid is the guy who bragged about how well they had done without a budget the past nearly 3 years.

Where do you get your info about this question? Media Matters, Kos, ThinkProg? I am getting mine from my Tea Party Congressman.

Who would have guested?

[Donna-501]

It certainly didn't. They should be taxing the $250,000 and above crowd.

[Wayland Woman]

Originally Posted by Donna-501

Who would have guested?

I hope Roy is prepared to get his Social Security check from the Tea Party if we don't get the debt ceiling raised on account of their stubbornness and ignorance.