Breaking: Cong. Joe Walsh's Naive Balanced Budget Amendment

Please tell me if this is good, bad or just ridiculous grandstanding.

Freshman Congressman Joe Walsh, Republican of Illinois, today introduced House Joint Resolution 54 (H.J.Res.54), described in his press release as "a Balanced Budget Amendment to the United States Constitution that provides a framework for putting our country on a path [to] economic stability." Okay, uh huh...

That sounds pretty good to those of us who are in favor of economic stability, but I wonder if Rep. Walsh is aware of the fact that much of what has been done by both houses of Congress has been unconstitutional.

My point is simple: We have a Congress that has repeatedly demonstrated its contempt for the U.S. Constitution. Given that, what hope is there that (a) such a bill stands a chance of passing both houses of Congress or that (b) if his bill did pass and become part of the Constitution itself, that Congress would respect it any more than it respects the rest of the document. H.J.Res.54 has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee.

Furthermore, Walsh's timing could not be clumsier. As the Congress is engaging in a budget battle that could shut down the Federal Government, his H.J.Res.54 only adds noise to the cacophony. It would have been better for Walsh to have waited until after the current fracas has resolved itself. The bill, and the timing of it and his press release, does nothing to further the current Republican efforts in Congress. The timing smells of opportunism and of a man desperate for attention.

Have a look at Walsh's press release, and don't be afraid to chuckle out loud. 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Elizabeth Lauten Thursday, April 7, 2011 (202) 225-3711 Congressman Walsh Introduces Balanced Budget Amendment

“It’s time to bring our country out of the red” Washington, D.C. – As part of his ongoing effort to restore fiscal responsibility in Washington, Congressman Joe Walsh (R-IL) today introduced H.J.Res.54, a Balanced Budget Amendment to the United States Constitution that provides a framework for putting our country on a path economic stability. This amendment is the House-companion to the Senate amendment that all 47 Republicans unanimously introduced last week, which would require the President to submit a balanced budget to Congress prior to each fiscal year.

“The federal government cannot continue to burden our children with this crushing deficit,” said Congressman Walsh. “American families have been working through a recession for the past three years by spending less and saving more, yet the federal government continues to spend money it simply does not have. Congress has neglected the real root cause and continues to be part of the problem, not part of the solution.”

“This amendment is the solution. If the average American family has to find a way to balance their checkbook each year and live within their means, there is no reason that the federal government can’t do the same.” “It was important to me that my first piece of legislation as a United States Congressman serves the American people by easing the burden of the government in their daily lives. A key provision to this amendment is to ensure that the budget is not balanced on the backs of hard working Americans, and thus H.J.Res.54 would require a 2/3 super-majority in both Houses for any tax increase.”

“Most importantly, this amendment shows families and businesses across America that Congress is serious about stabilizing our economy long-term. It’s time to bring our country out of the red.” The Balanced Budget Amendment resolution features the following key provisions:

• Presidential requirement to submit a balanced budget and Congressional requirement to pass a balanced budget; • Federal spending cap that Congress must limit outlays to no more than 18 percent of GDP, in line with the historical average of revenues over the last 40 years (this year, the federal government is projected to spend close to 25% of GDP); 

• Prohibits the courts from ordering revenue increases.  

###

Springfield And Washington - Capitols Of Cowardice

CNN's Jack Cafferty slammed the Democrats in Congress last night for their failure to pass a federal budget (see the video below). Although he was scolding the Dems in Washington for their lack of resolve, Cafferty could have been talking about Illinois legislators in Springfield. Although the Illinois General Assemby did pass something of a budget in early June, they just couldn't muster the courage to include any substantial spending cuts. Governor Quinn, a Democrat himself, just can't muster the courage to veto that worthless budget. WJBD Radio reports that Quinn "did say however he wishes that the General Assembly had done more to close the state's spending gap. Instead, lawmakers have handed Quinn the power to make the cuts he deems necessary." The state's fiscal year ends on June 30th, 19 days from now, but they just could take the time to hammer out the needed cuts in billions of dollars being misspent and wasted. They passed the buck, literally and figuratively, to the hapless Pat Quinn. WJBD says that he "is still pushing for the Senate to pass a four-billion-dollar borrowing plan to pay down the state's pension debt." Quinn, however, is as cowardly and as clueless as the legislators: On the one hand, he wants the lawmakers to reduce the state's deficit, yet on the other hand he thinks that borrowing four billion dollars to do that is somehow better than actually reducing spending. In other words, neither the Illinois Governor nor the Illinois lawmakers have the courage to make politically unpopular - but absolutely necessary - cuts in spending. As Jack Cafferty would say, "they can’t be seen cutting things in an election year." "The budget approved by the General Assembly last week has a $25.9 billion general fund, that has already been cut by $1.3 million. But with $6 billion in overdue bills and a $3.7 billion pension contribution due in a little more than a month, programs and services will be eliminated," reports The Quincy Herald-Whig. "Mike Rein of Transitions of Western Illinois said the state owes $2.5 million to that agency, which serves people who have disabilities and those needing mental health counseling. 'Illinois is a deadbeat state. They don't pay their bills,' Rein said." The "deadbeat state" of Illinois is so bad a paying vendors and service providers that a debt-brokering company in Georgia is moving to take advantage of the situation. Put simply, the company will loan money to qualifying vendors who are stuck waiting for "deadbeat" Illinois to pay them for services rendered. MyFoxChicago reports that Alpharetta Industries can arrange "for struggling vendors to sell their overdue paper at a discount. Sellers would get most of the money owed to them now. The buyers would collect the full amount from the state later. [They] would take a cut as the middleman." While some would call Alpharetta Industries "vultures," MyFoxChicago quotes one vendor as saying that, "At the end of the day it was better to have some money than no money." Those are the words of Na-Tae Thompson, "whose nonprofit True Star Foundation is waiting on $75,000 from the state that hasn't arrived." (Source: Ibid) If Alpharetta is a "vulture," then the State of Illinois is a parasite, sucking out lifeblood and giving nothing back. It should be remembered that vultures do not kill. Rather, they clean up the mess. Parasites, all too often, cause death or incapacitating illness, and only then do the vultures have opportunity. Unlike a real vulture, however, debt brokers offer the victims of parasites the time and hope needed to heal and, possibly, recover.

xx

"See, it’s an election year; they can’t be seen cutting things in an election year." xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

Cafferty said: At a time of skyrocketing federal deficits and a national debt that just passed $13 trillion, the Democrats in Congress can’t be bothered to pass a budget for next year. That’s their job. Congress is supposed to decide how to spend the taxpayers’ money. They are mandated to pass a budget; and presumably to stick to it… but that’s a whole other story. Yet efforts to pass a budget have stalled in the House because Democrats can’t agree on what and how much to cut..... Cafferty gets then turned sarcastic, but his words ring true: See, it’s an election year; they can’t be seen cutting things in an election year. As I said, that applies to the cowards of Springfield, too. Republican Bill Brady is Quinn's challenger in the Illinois gubernatorial race, and the latest Rasmussen pol shows Brady ahead of Quinn by 11 points, 47% to 36%. It's no wonder. Voters know that it's the Democrats who call the shots in Springfield, and that Quinn is one of them. The voters know that it's the Democrats who sunk Illinois into its current financial abyss, and most seem to understand that the Democrats are incapable of pulling us out. Perhaps the voters themselves can pull us out by means of voting for real change - and fewer Democrats - in November. RELATED: Debt Broker Will Make Money off Illinois' State Budget Crisis‎ MyFox Chicago Pain of Illinois state budget woes will be felt by all‎ Quincy Herald Whig Universities Owed $630 Million; Borrowing Power Not Yet Approved Illinois Statehouse News Our opinion: Budget problems ultimately will cost taxpayers more 24newstime.com Rasmussen: Brady Holds Lead Backyard Conservative We Buy Ugly Statehouses St Louis Today

Video Explains Obama's Budget Freeze Icecube

Watch the video, then also see Pay No Attention to that Debt Behind the Curtain! by Bill Wilson.

Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed

The National Debt Road Trip (Video)

Barack Obama: Spending Speed Demon. Conservative Hats & Shirts Leave a Comment - Chicago News Bench RSS Feed Visit us on Twitter!

Mayor Daley Wants Obama to Feel Your Pain

'Scuse me, can you spare $24,000 for a Gulfstream jet ride for my date night? More hypocrisy from Chicago Mayor Richard Daley on Friday, August 7, when he made a suggestion for Barack Obama. “I hope every federal employee from the president all the way down takes 15 days without pay to turn that money back to taxpayers’ use, because they’re getting laid off, they’re getting cut back, there are no jobs out there,” Daley said Friday. (Source: Chicago Sun-Times) What Daley is suggesting is simply a bad joke made in poor taste, as only an out-of-touch elitist could. It is a joke, a tragic joke, loaded with irony and hypocrisy. Mayor Daley's budgeted salary, by the way, is $216,210 (source: Chicago Tribune). Get your calculators out, folks. Barack Obama's presidential salary is $400,000 per year. An ordinary person who works 40 hours per week (eight hours for five work days) puts in a total of 2,000 hours every year. That's 50 weeks multiplied by 40 hours, with the assumption of two weeks of unpaid vacation, personal time or sick days. It's not exact, but it's close enough for this discussion: If you break down Obama's $400,000 and divide it by 2,000 hours, it comes to $200 per hour. Now, multiply 15 unpaid days by eight hours, which comes to 120 hours. At $200 per hour, it would come to $24,000 for Barack Obama to take the 15 unpaid furlough days suggested by Mayor Daley. $24,000 sounds like a lot of money to the average America, and it certainly is, but wealthy Barack Obama would still have $376,000 of his presidential salary, plus his millions already in the bank, plus residual checks for the continuing sales of his books. $24,000 figures into another story, the one about Barack and Michelle's Big Date in New York. Remember that? Rather than going out in Washington, the Obama's flew to New York in a Gulfstream jet with two other small planes following with staff and reporters. Who paid for it? You did, according to the New York Post: Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included orchestra seat tickets at $96.50 apiece, and at least $24,000 for each of three aircraft - including two smaller aircraft for White House staff and reporters - used for the trip, sources said. Obama's jet, a fancy Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential 747. The NYPD refused to divulge the cost of providing security and the White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers. Isn't that nice? Barack is so generous to Michelle, especially when he's spending your money on her. Will Mayor Daley also ask Obama to forego future taxpayer funded date nights? Will Daley ask all federal employees to stop using taxpayer funded Gulfstream jets to take their spouses on fancy out-of-town date nights? Will Daley suggest that Obama reimburse the taxpayers for what can only be called a personal night out? You bet he won't, because Daley and Obama are two elitist Illinois Democrats, cut from the same rotten cloth. Talk a good game, make symbolic gestures, maybe even give up something insignificant to make it look like you're in touch with the Common Man. Now let's take a federal employee who's making $50,000 per year ($25/hour). His or her unpaid 15-day furlough would come to $3,000 leaving him/her with $47,000 before taxes. For a federal employee making $30,000, the unpaid furlough would amount to $1,800, leaving him/her with $28,200 before taxes. Both $3,000 and $1,800 also sound like a lot of money to the average American, and indeed those amounts could make the difference for many in terms of being able to pay the rent or mortgage. For the average federal employee, the unpaid furlough is a huge sacrifice, especially when you consider that very few of them have the keys to that Gulfstream 500. For Barack Obama, an unpaid 15-day furlough would not make a difference. He is, after all, wealthy from his book sales. Even before he became the president, he and wife Michelle were doing quite well, thank you very much. And that lead us to the irony and hypocrisy of Daley's suggestion to Obama. We often hear Democrats, Liberals and "Progressives" speak in favor of taxing "the rich" at higher rates than the non-rich. Why, then, is Democrat Daley proposing that wealthy Obama only sacrifice at the same rate as the average, non-wealthy federal employee. Think about it. Two weeks out of 50 equals four (4) percent of the annual work time (of 2,000 hours), so Daley is effectively suggesting that Obama and all federal employees give up four percent of their pay. Why is wealthy Obama not being asked by Democrat Daley to give up, say, eight percent of his pay? Would that be more "fair," in the same way that taxing the wealthy at a higher rate is "fair?" Furthermore, does anybody really think that a four percent reduction of federal wages will make a dent in the multi-trillion dollar deficit? It will not, of course. Will unemployed people who do not work for the federal government feel any better about their own dire situations because federal employees are made to pointlessly suffer? I doubt it. So, Mayor Daley suggested 15 unpaid days for federal employees, "from the president all the way down," in order to "turn that money back to taxpayers’ use, because they’re getting laid off, they’re getting cut back, there are no jobs out there.” If Daley and other Democrats really want to turn money back to taxpayers, they should do so directly via tax reductions, from sales taxes to income taxes to all other taxes. If Daley really wants to make symbolic gestures to the American people by way of showing empathy for their suffering, perhaps he should suggest that Obama quit his job and go stand on a street corner, cup in hand. You know, to feel the pain. To really, actually feel the pain. Cross-posted to Red County United STRAIGHTS of America Leave a Comment... Chicago News Bench RSS Feed We're on Twitter...