I just had someone look up the 1974 Budget Act and the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Budget Enforcement Act to find out what the timeframe was for estimates to be given. And my understanding is that--I am sure the Senator knows the 1974…

That is exactly my point. It is very clear that it says it ``shall not exceed'' and the suggestion that you have made is that a $75 billion deficit would be permitted under the Constitution, it seems to me.

Are there not subsequent updates by the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Management and Budget, and reports from the Treasury as to actual receipts and revenues that one could, if one were in Congress or the Senate, adjust to…

Is it not possible, under implementing legislation, for us to require the Congressional Budget Office or the Office of Management and Budget to put forth a monthly calculation of what the deficit will be so we have our finger on the pulse…

There is a dependent clause after ``Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year . . .'' It then says `` . . . unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law…

The point the Senator from West Virginia was alluding to was section 1 of the bill: Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year * * * It is unenforceable, unworkable; these estimates will throw…

Are you arguing that is outside the purview of the balanced budget amendment--what they are doing is outside? That would be violative of the balanced budget amendment.

That is exactly right. That was my point. You will not know whether you have met the charge of the constitutional amendment until the end of the year.

the three-fifths override provision in the constitutional amendment is but an option available to this body to fund emergencies. Another option that is available is the one that is detailed in that letter which is to rescind obligated…

I was just questioning. Are you suggesting that negligible amounts could mean rather extraordinary amounts? You are not suggesting that a Member of the Senate would violate his constitutional oath of office to uphold the Constitution which…

It is not unprecedented that we would have an implementing piece of legislation.

I am not suggesting there is. I am suggesting what they are doing is the responsible thing. Is it not your understanding that what they are saying is that they want to offset new expenditures with spending cuts from someplace else in the…

I suggest to the Senator from West Virginia that the majority of the Members of the House would vote for a rescission package to fund it, which would accomplish the same thing.

If the Senator will yield, in the last sentence, the operative underlined that I see is the word ``can'' require. They do not have to do so. But they can. They also have the option, if I understand, to rescind, retroactively tax, or ``by a…

does the plain, unmistakable, clear language say the budget ``shall'' not? I mean, is not that very clear from the language, that it ``shall'' not be?

But they also said--did they not ask the President to find rescissions to offset those expenditures?

would it not be in keeping with the balanced budget amendment that they would offset so that the deficit would show zero based on that particular transaction?

That is the safeguard against deficits. We cannot just incur a deficit because we have to raise the debt limit. We cannot raise the debt limit without a three-fifths majority. Thereby we are bound to do something about the deficit. So we…

In fact, would you not suggest that with this constitutional amendment it would be incumbent upon us to pass some sort of implementing legislation?

My question to you, Senator, is the language from the constitutional amendment is very clear, that at the end of the fiscal year revenues will not exceed--excuse me. Expenditures will not exceed revenues. That is very clear.

I keep hearing this familiar refrain, ``I am for a balanced budget-- but.'' ``I really believe in a balanced budget-- however.'' ``We need to get to a balanced budget but this constitutional amendment just is not the way to do it.''…

Let me tell you what the constitutional amendment is to balance the budget. It is the clock. You see, the game will not start unless the clock starts, and that makes the teams get on the field. It makes them get on the field and start…

what I want to do is first respond to the Senator from Kentucky and a couple of points that he made, and then talk in general about the problem I think we are confronting here in this debate on unfunded mandates. I would agree with the…

This is an important issue of gaining credibility with the American public that we are not going to treat ourselves any different than any other Federal employee when it comes to employee benefits. It puts us on a level no more and no less…