On the recordMarch 17, 1994
I rise in opposition to the Stenholm amendment but not in opposition, certainly, to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Stenholm] and his efforts to balance the budget. The reason I oppose his constitutional amendment, however, is that I do not think it would balance the budget but, instead, would enshrine in the Constitution the principle of minority rule. The proposal would apply a 60-percent super majority vote requirement to any budget-related legislation, which I think is counter to the intentions of our Founding Fathers when they wrote the Constitution. While I am opposed to any constitutional amendment to balance the budget, I support efforts to achieve one. In particular, I commend the Clinton administration and Congress for taking steps last year which in 1994, now, have reduced the deficit by 40 percent. This year's budget resolution keeps budget deficits on a downward path. In fact, this will be the first time in 26 years that the total discretionary spending will actually decline from one year to the next without even an adjustment for inflation.
Source
govinfo.gov




