Orrin Hatch: “I believe that this gamesmanship is exactly what must be avoided. The way to avoid it is to reject such exemptions. The…”

“I believe that this gamesmanship is exactly what must be avoided. The way to avoid it is to reject such exemptions. The best way to protect retirees of future generations is to adopt a clean and strong balanced budget amendment, free of loopholes. Significantly, critics of Senate Joint Resolution 1, who wish to exempt Social Security, have not demonstrated in the least how they would balance the budget without including the present Social Security trust fund surpluses, which, as I stated, is only temporary. Presumably, without including the present surpluses in budget calculations, other programs would have to suffer greater cuts. It is ironic that many of those who argue that a balanced budget constitutional amendment would cause cuts in social programs are themselves calling for the exemption of Social Security, advocating draconian cuts in their most favorite programs. Let me give you an example. Between the years 2002 and 2007, without including the surplus, the deficit will appear to be $700 billion larger than it is. This means either a mammoth tax hike on all American families--almost $1,100 per year per household--or devastating cuts in important programs like Medicare, cancer, and other disease research, Head Start, and environmental cleanup.”