Dobbs: Our next guest has vigorously opposed any efforts to raise
the debt ceiling unless a balanced budget amendment is passed… Senator, we are
here, the “catastrophe” that Timothy Geithner predicted, the rhetoric that
flowed from this administration for weeks and months has now been proved to be
at best hyperbolic and fear mongering. What is the situation, as you see is?
Lee: The lights are still on, we have not disappeared into thin
air. That is not to say we don’t face a daunting challenge in the next few
months as we figure out what to do about this, but it underscores the point
which is to say you can simply present this to the Congress as a must-have.
There are other alternatives including, and especially, agreement that we need
a balanced budget amendment in place before we raise the debt limit again. We
have to put a structural permanent change in place to restrict the way Washington spends
money before we can allow Washington to take on a new credit card.
Dobbs: Let’s assume everybody was so rational to pass your
legislation, what would be the effect, when would a balanced budget be
required, how much time would you all have? … Why in the world do you think a
balanced budget amendment would not simply be ignored?
Lee: First of all when something becomes part of the Constitution,
Congress can’t ignore it. There would be enormous political consequences and
legal consequences as well if it tried to. To answer the first part of your
question, this particular proposal backed by all 47 Republicans in the United
States Senate contains a five year delayed implementation clause. It would take
effect 5 years after being ratified by the states. That would give Congress
enough time to reach the comfortable glide path toward balancing its budget.
Dobbs: Why wouldn’t [Congress] understand it is time to bring to
bear the judgment, their wisdom and prudence and sense of responsibility
instead of being forced by constitutional amendment, it would seem to me that
would be entirely practical without the benefit of a balanced budget amendment?
Lee: This is an argument raised frequently. I am sympathetic to it
in many respects. But at the end of the day we have to remember every time in
the past when Congress has adopted statutory spending limits, those remain
intact and respected in the short-term. In the long term, within five years,
Congress starts to ignore them. Congress will eventually repeal its way out.
Dobbs: How long does it take?
Lee: Usually within five years Congress weasels its way out [of
statutory spending reforms].
Dobbs: …This is a Congress, a Senate and a White House that
frankly is overwhelmed with its burden of being factual and straightforward
when it comes to fiscal policy, is it?
Lee: That is right… The point is, if all we can
get are statutory spending caps – which we do need, they are necessary, I
applaud them, I encourage them – but if that is all we have, that is not enough
because Congress controls the law. It can waive its way out of the law. In the
past, Congress has been its own walking, living, breathing waiver. We have to put into the text of the Constitution
so that Congress can’t exempt its way out of it when times get tough.