On the recordMarch 16, 1994
I rise in support of the amendment offered by my good friend from Arizona, Jon Kyl. The opponents of a balanced budget amendment say that we don't need it, well, 24 straight unbalanced budgets says we do. The opponents of a balanced budget amendment say that we don't need it, well, $200 billion deficits says we do. The opponents of a balanced budget amendment say that we don't need it, well, a $4.5 trillion debt says we do. The opponents of a balanced budget amendment say that we don't need it, well, a 73 to 342 vote against the Solomon-Fawell-Upton balanced budget last week says we do. My constituents in southwestern Michigan not only say that they want Congress to balance the budget, but also they want, less Government spending and a Presidential line-item veto--that's exactly what we have in the Kyl spending limitation amendment. The Kyl amendment is very similar to the Stenholm proposal--except that it places a specific spending limit on the Federal Government and gives the President a line-item veto. Under the Kyl amendment, Federal spending would be limited to 19 percent of the gross domestic product, which is about the average level of tax dollars collected by the Federal Government over the last generation. Let us give our constituents what they want: a balanced budget, a Federal spending limit, and a Presidential line-item veto. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Kyl spending limitation amendment.
Source
govinfo.gov




