Rigging the Constitution for the GOP - POLITICO.com Print View

Rigging the Constitution for the GOP By: Chris Van Hollen July 21, 2011 09:39 PM EDT

With only 12 days to go before the United States risks defaulting on its debt, our nation is at a crossroads. Unfortunately, rather than working to find common ground, House Republicans voted this week to prevent the U.S. from paying its bills unless we enshrine their radical budget proposal into the Constitution. President Barack Obama has put a compromise plan on the table that would reduce the deficit by about $4 trillion over roughly 10 years. It builds on the framework established by the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles Commission, which calls for $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue increases. This plan would raise revenue beginning in 2013 by closing corporate tax loopholes and returning the highest 2 percent of income earners to the same tax rate in place during the Clinton administration — when the economy was booming and 20 million jobs were created. Obama also proposed extending the payroll tax holiday through 2012 — to give all working Americans more disposable income to boost consumer demand and the economy. Republicans walked away from the table because they refused to raise one penny of revenue to help reduce the deficit. Instead of accepting this balanced approach, House Republicans passed legislation to prevent the United States from lifting the debt ceiling to pay our bills until two-thirds of Congress votes to accept their proposed changes to the Constitution. Since economists and financial experts from across the political spectrum have warned that failure to lift the debt ceiling by Aug. 2 could have catastrophic economic consequences, it is worth examining what constitutional changes Republicans are demanding in exchange for allowing America to pay its bills and prevent default. Republicans are proposing radical changes under the popular guise of a so-called balanced-budget amendment. However, their proposed amendment is “balanced” in name only. In reality, it is a cynical attempt to rig the Constitution to favor the Republican approach to reducing the deficit. It would write into the Constitution two mechanisms that stack the deck in favor of reducing the deficit by slashing critical investments and shredding the social safety net, while protecting special interest tax loopholes. The first mechanism favors big monied special interests over American families. It allows for a simple majority vote to reduce the deficit by cutting Social Security, Medicare or education — but requires a two-thirds vote to reduce the deficit by cutting corporate tax loopholes or raising the rates for millionaires. This provision would also make it easier for Washington lobbyists to get pork barrel tax breaks into the tax code (a simple majority vote) than for reformers to eliminate them to reduce the deficit (a two-thirds vote). The measure essentially re-engineers the Constitution to protect existing tax breaks for the rich and powerful — at the expense of critical investments in education and protections for our seniors and the most vulnerable. The second device to graft the GOP budget plan into the Constitution is an artificial spending cap. The constitutional amendment recently passed out of the House Judiciary Committee would cap federal spending at 18 percent of gross domestic product by 2016 — a level exceeded every year since 1966. Given the growing number of retiring baby boomers, that arbitrary ceiling will inevitably force Congress to dismantle Medicare and Social Security instead of working to strengthen it for future generations. This type of ideological rigidity does not belong in our nation’s founding document. Instead, it reflects a backdoor attempt to impose the GOP budget plan by manipulating the Constitution. These devices establish permanent, undemocratic barriers that could make it impossible for future Congresses to respond to the will of the people. A majority of the public may choose to balance the budget at a different level than the GOP’s artificial cap, or with a balanced approach that includes additional revenue. But the supermajority requirement and the arbitrary spending cap prevent the American people from choosing to balance the budget in a way different than the Republicans’ demands. My Republican colleagues seek to justify their proposal by observing that 49 of the 50 states have balanced-budget requirements. This is a deeply misleading comparison. Only 14 states require a supermajority to raise revenue, and only 16 states have spending caps written into their constitutions. Moreover, states borrow money for capital investments in things like schools, roads and other infrastructure — which would be prohibited by the Republican amendment — and they don’t have to pay for wars or national emergencies. The hour is late for getting serious about reaching a real compromise that can build a national consensus for addressing the debt ceiling and moving our economy forward. This is no time for introducing a Trojan horse under the “balanced budget” mantle to embed the GOP’s right-wing budget framework into the Constitution, while threatening to tank the economy, throw people out of work and drive up interest rates and the deficit if it is not accepted. Let’s return to the table to hammer out a balanced compromise. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is the ranking member of the House Budget Committee.