On the recordMarch 1, 1994
I don't know. We've got a record that ought to defeat it. I mean, the problem with the amendment if you read it is, on its terms, if it's carried out, it will require either a large tax increase or big cuts in defense and domestic programs critical to our job growth or both. And if it's ignored, it will--by ignoring it, that is if you say, ``Well, we can't do this; we're going to suspend it,'' then you put the whole future of the country in the hands of the 40 percent plus one vote in both Houses of Congress. And I don't think that's a very good thing. Under the plan we're now following, if the Congress adopts this budget with its spending limits, we'll have the first 3 years since the Truman Presidency a declining deficit. We're moving in the right direction. I think that's very important. So I hope that the Senate will not adopt it. I know it's politically popular, but I don't think it's good policy. And I'd like to point out for the point of view of the American people who say, ``Well, State and local governments do it,'' all State and local governments make sharp distinctions between long-term capital investments and current expenditures. And this balanced budget amendment makes absolutely no distinction. So it would be far more severe than State and local balanced budget laws and with a very uncertain economic impact. So I'm hoping the Senate will reject it.
Source
govinfo.gov




