As the debate over the nation’s debt ceiling heats up, many
are wondering not only whether Congress will support an increase, but also what
measures will the opponents of an increase demand in return for lifting the
limit.  I stand firmly behind a proposal
that, in return for allowing a vote on the debt ceiling, will begin to
fundamentally change the way Washington spends money. 

In a letter distributed last week, I asked my Republican
colleagues in the Senate to join me in opposing any increase in the debt
ceiling unless or until both houses of Congress have passed the Hatch-Lee
Balanced Budget Amendment.  The amendment
would cap future spending at 18% of GDP and require a supermajority in both
houses to run an annual deficit for a specific purpose, raise the debt ceiling,
and increase taxes. 

To borrow from Churchill, to get spending under control, a
balanced budget amendment is the worst solution except all the others that have
been tried.  And Congress has tried
several. 

Previous Congresses have attempted to restrict spending
through statutory restrictions such as the Balanced Budget and Emergency
Deficit Control Act, more commonly known as Gramm-Rudman, and the Budget
Enforcement Act.  Both failed to control
spending long-term because of each of the laws’ built-in limitations and the
ease with which subsequent Congresses were able to reform, repeal, dismantle
and ultimately ignore the restrictions. 

The debt ceiling itself is some measure of a spending
restraint, but, again, because it only requires a majority vote to increase the
cap, lifting the limit has been little more than a formality from year to
year. 

The worst solution of all has been to do nothing and simply
trust that the President and Congress will produce fiscally responsible budgets
and spending bills.  From unenforced debt
limits, to enacting new entitlements, to “emergency” spending bills loaded with
pork, Washington has proven that it cannot be trusted to act responsibly in the
short-term to ensure the country’s long-term prosperity. It would be gross
fiscal negligence not to impose some structural, binding, and permanent spending
restraint on Congress at a time when our national debt threatens to collapse
our economy.

Back to Churchill, several proposals have been floated as
possible bargains for increasing the debt limit.  Unquestionably the “best worst” solution,
indeed the only one that has a real chance of permanently changing the way
Washington spends money, is the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment.  It is the very nature of a constitutional
amendment that makes the proposal a highly effective limitation on Congress’s
insatiable appetite to spend.  Unlike
other statutory reforms that have failed because they needed only a simple
majority to dismantle, an amendment to the Constitution would require
overwhelming support from Congress and the American people to return to the
country to the status quo. 

I will continue to encourage my colleagues to oppose an
increase in the debt limit unless and until we pass the Hatch-Lee Balanced
Budget Amendment.  For anyone serious
about preserving the long-term prosperity of our country, it should be an easy
stand to take.