Lamar Smith: “Mr. Chairman, the balanced budget amendments being offered by Representatives Kyl, Barton, Stenholm, and Smith deserve…”

“Mr. Chairman, the balanced budget amendments being offered by Representatives Kyl, Barton, Stenholm, and Smith deserve our support. The alternative being offered by Representatives Wise, Price, Pomeroy, and Furse is just a diversion. Political cover is no substitute for fiscal responsibility. When you threaten the Washington power structure, you can expect a powerful response. This is what the authentic balanced budget amendments do. Critics claim an amendment would "lock-in" Congress to draconian deficit reduction that would burden the economy. In the event of a recession, an amendment would supposedly have adverse effects--keeping taxes up when the economy needed just the opposite from the Government. But, these amendments are not inflexible. They can be overridden with sufficient votes, and I am sure they would be with sufficient cause, such as a dramatic economic downturn or national emergency. Getting congressional support for spending has not been a problem. If it had been, we would not be debating this legislation today. Is the amendment too draconian? Does it cut too deeply, too quickly? There is a fundamental flaw in the critics' assertion that less Government spending equals less national spending. The money the Government does not spend will still be spent and invested.”