From that article;

Quote:Senate Republicans have been divided for months between two different versions of the BBA, one co-sponsored by Sens. Orrin Hatch (Utah) and John Cornyn (Texas) and the other co-sponsored by Sens. Jon Kyl (Ariz.) and Mike Lee (Utah). There were 33 Republicans who supported the Hatch-Cornyn amendment, and 17 supported an amendment by Lee and Kyl. Other Senators had specific concerns about provisions in both versions of the BBA.

Two weeks ago, Senators Hatch, Cornyn, Lee, Kyl, and Pat Toomey (Penn.) announced a press conference to unveil their versions of the BBA. McConnell told them to call off the press conference until they had a united Republican conference in support of one final piece of legislation.

Then, McConnell asked the principals in the BBA debate to go back and negotiate a unified version that took into account all the requests from members of the caucus. The final version which they are announced on Thursday is co-sponsored by every Senate Republican.

I do like much of this:

- President is REQUIRED, prior to the fiscal year start, to submit a balanced budget to Congress.

- Congress is REQUIRED to pass a balanced budget, with a few limited exceptions.

- 18 Percent Spending Cap: as compared with the GDP. (With several notable exceptions - one is a DECLARED war).

Not so enthusiastic about this one but I suspect I know why:

- "Effective Date: Becomes effective the fifth fiscal year after ratification."

Ratification would be a battle that could be drawn out for years and end up in courts. Even with all the GOP Senators on board, this will go nowhere with Senate Dems. Even though they "only" need 20 Dems for passage, we all know that it will not get that support. There are consequences from your party if you abandon the party line on this.

It is a symbolic issue, nothing more. However, in the upcoming election, they can trot it out and say "Hey, we tried! Look at which party stopped this idea. Compare it to their rhetoric. YOU decide who is more serious about the deficit and our budget problems. "

(03-19-2011 12:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Until somebody has the guts to put forth a budget that is actually balanced, all this talk about a balanced budget amendment is so much BS.

We don't need a balanced budget amendment, we need a balanced budget. THEN talk about an amendment to keep it that way.

Maybe we need to nix the POTUS term limit and bring back the last POTUS that had a balanced budget.

(04-06-2011 10:09 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-19-2011 12:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Until somebody has the guts to put forth a budget that is actually balanced, all this talk about a balanced budget amendment is so much BS.

We don't need a balanced budget amendment, we need a balanced budget. THEN talk about an amendment to keep it that way.

Maybe we need to nix the POTUS term limit and bring back the last POTUS that had a balanced budget.

Would work for me. But you knew that.