David Cay Johnston: “We had a provision in Gramm-Rudman called sequestration. My colleagues will remember that well. If the budget was not…”

“We had a provision in Gramm-Rudman called sequestration. My colleagues will remember that well. If the budget was not balanced, or if we did not meet the target provided in Gramm-Rudman, there was to be this automatic guillotine that fell. There was going to be a chopped-off spending by a prearranged formula, and it was all going to be arranged and that was going to substitute for the backbone of Congress. Of course, what happened, we got right up to look at that gleaming guillotine which was going to cut off spending, and the Congress, predictably, said, at least the opponents of Gramm-Rudman said, it was going to be this. We said, ``No, stay the guillotine, stay the sequestration, don't do it.'' Here we are with a different kind of guillotine. Either we are going to have a permanent block in the guillotine, which is what the Nunn amendment says, nonenforceability, or we are going to go back to the old guillotine. Mr. President, can you imagine what the American public would say if the Supreme Court made an order that said, ``We're going to increase your income tax by 50 percent?'' Why, there would be rioting in the streets.”