Dianne Feinstein: “the amendment I have just sent to the desk essentially differs from the Senate Joint Resolution 1, the majority balanced…”

“the amendment I have just sent to the desk essentially differs from the Senate Joint Resolution 1, the majority balanced budget amendment, in just four ways. I would like to quickly summarize the distinctions and then go over each one of them and explain why I believe this amendment will stand the test of scrutiny. This substitute approach, in my view, represents how we need to address the balanced budget amendment. Mr. President, we have just had quite a bit of debate on the Reid amendment. The arguments have been made as to why the Social Security trust funds, should be removed from the unified budget. This amendment would allow Social Security trust funds to continue to remain as part of the unified budget up to the point Congress achieves balance, which has been estimated at 2002. The administration and Congress have both indicated a commitment to balancing the budget by 2002. This amendment respects that goal. The amendment would require that 1 year after enactment, whenever the amendment is ratified by three-quarters of the legislatures of the States, the amendment would go into effect and be binding. If the amendment becomes effective in 2002, the year in which bipartisan consensus exists for balancing the budget, the year in which Social Security would be excluded would be 2003.”