The House of Representatives took up Rep. Bob Goodlatte’s balanced budget amendment proposal and fell 23 votes short of passing it. That may not necessarily come as a surprise. what does, though, are some of the groups mustered to oppose the idea, and the grounds upon which they urged a “no” vote. For example:
…Democrats pointed to a letter from some 275 labor and other mostly liberal groups saying that forcing spending cuts or higher taxes to balance the budget when the economy was slow “would risk tipping a faltering economy into recession or worsening an ongoing downturn, costing large numbers of jobs.”
We can only imagine what they might think will happen when the super committee punts, and a sequester trims a smidgen off the top of all federal spending. And interesting, too, to see the opposition to higher taxes.
Or consider this:
Democrats also cited a report by the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimating that, if there is not an increase in revenues, the amendment could force Congress to cut all programs by an average of 17.3 percent by 2018.
Circumstances may dictate that happen by 2017 anyway.
Nevertheless, here’s how Virginia’s worthies voted:
Yeas: Cantor, Forbes, Goodlatte, Griffith, Hurt, Rigell, Wittman, Wolf
Nays: Connolly, Moran, Scott
Interestingly, one of the handful of Republicans to vote against the measure was Paul Ryan. His reasoning?
“I’m concerned that this version will lead to a much bigger government fueled by more taxes,” Ryan said in a statement. “Spending is the problem, yet this version of the BBA makes it more likely taxes will be raised, government will grow, and economic freedom will be diminished. Without a limit on government spending, I cannot support this Amendment.”
Interesting.
