{
  "id": "98-671",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "98-671",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 105199,
      "date": "1998-08-05",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:53:01.937941",
      "title": "A Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment: Procedural Issues and Legislative History",
      "summary": "One of the most persistent political issues of recent years has been the federal budget of the\nUnited\nStates and its deficit. Since the 1930s, dozens of proposals have called for laws or constitutional\namendments that would require a balanced budget and/or limit the size or growth of the federal\nbudget or of the public debt. The accumulation of large deficits since the 1970s has heightened the\nfeeling of some policymakers and other observers that the Constitution should be amended to require\nthe federal government to balance revenues and expenditures.\n  The chief debate has been on the necessity of making such a requirement a part of the\nConstitution, but other questions have arisen as well. How would such a requirement affect the\nbalance of power between the President and Congress? If Congress and the President failed to pass\na balanced budget, how would the requirement be enforced? Should there be exceptions or\ncircumstances when the requirement would not be enforced? \n  In the 104th Congress, the House Republican leadership placed a balanced budget constitutional\namendment on the agenda as part of its \"Contract with America.\" The House passed\n H.J.Res. 1 , as amended, by the necessary two-thirds majority (300-132) on January 26,\n1996. However, votes in the Senate on a balanced budget amendment fell short of achieving the\nnecessary two-thirds majority vote on two occasions -- March 2, 1995, 65-35; and June 6, 1996,\n64-35.\n  Consideration of a balanced budget constitutional amendment has been renewed in the 105th\nCongress. The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on  S.J.Res. 1  on January 17\nand 22, 1997, and ordered it reported on January 30. The Senate began debating the measure on\nFebruary 5, 1997, and on March 4 it was defeated when it fell short of the necessary two-thirds\nmajority, 66-34. In the House, consideration in the 105th Congress has not advanced as far. After\nhearings by the Judiciary Committee (on February 3, 1997) and the Budget Committee (on February\n5, 1997), the Judiciary Committee began a markup of  H.J.Res. 1  on February 5, but\nrecessed without coming to any conclusion. No further action has been taken.\n  While the debate on a balanced budget amendment has continued, both Congress and the\nPresident have also worked towards the goal of achieving a balanced budget. The combined effect\nof the growth of the U.S. economy and efforts to restructure spending and revenues is a\nCongressional Budget Office (CBO) projection that the federal budget is expected to be balanced in\n1998 and is likely to remain so for several years. On February 2, 1998, President William Clinton\nsubmitted the first proposed balanced budget since 1970. Subsequently, both the House and the\nSenate adopted concurrent resolutions on the budget, projecting a surplus.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/98-671",
          "sha1": "3ae9993a675f00c05f478046c3db502c94943f73",
          "filename": "files/19980805_98-671_3ae9993a675f00c05f478046c3db502c94943f73.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/19980805_98-671_3ae9993a675f00c05f478046c3db502c94943f73.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Constitutional Questions"
  ]
}