WASHINGTON -- The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday rejected calls for a balanced-budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The measure, which would prohibit deficit spending, was supported by 233 members but fell short of the two-thirds majority required for passage. Seven Democrats and 226 Republicans supported the proposal. Six Republicans and 178 Democrats opposed it. If the measure passed in both houses of Congress, it would still require three-fourths of the states to ratify it.
All four House members from Arkansas favored the measure; U.S. Rep. French Hill, a Republican from Little Rock, was one of its co-sponsors.
The national debt surpassed $21 trillion earlier this year, and the Congressional Budget Office foresees nothing but red ink over the next decade.
Recent tax cuts and spending increases have accelerated the gap between revenue and outlays, the Congressional Budget Office said.
The Congressional Budget Office predicts that the debt will grow by $12.4 trillion over the next decade.
Supporters say a constitutional amendment would force Congress to act responsibly. Opponents portrayed the vote as an election-year gimmick, engineered by the same people who have fueled deficit spending in recent months.
"It's a laugher," said former U.S. Sen. Alan Simpson, a Republican from Wyoming.
"The tea party guys, they [might] just as well go home and go to bed. Their sole purpose was to cut spending. Well, they got in there and they didn't cut anything. They just added to the spending and charged it to their grandchildren. What a bunch of fakes," he said in a telephone interview with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.
The 2016 Republican Party platform called for a balanced- budget amendment. Republican lawmakers have been pushing for the measure for decades.
The measure debated Thursday would have required a balanced-budget starting in the fifth fiscal year after it is ratified by the states. Deficit spending would still be allowed when there was a declaration of war or if a three-fifths majority of both houses voted to allow it.
U.S. Rep. Steve Womack, a Republican from Rogers, said Congress should "do everything we can to live within our means. We ask the American public to do it, and a lot of states and local political subdivisions do it. The Congress ought to do the same," he said.
Last month, Congress passed a $1.3 trillion spending bill, a package that critics said was fiscally irresponsible.
U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, a Republican from Dardanelle, and U.S. Rep. Bruce Westerman, a Republican from Hot Springs, were the only members of the state delegation opposed to the spending measure. The others supported it.
Womack said he voted for the measure because it provided much-needed funding for the nation's service members.
"Obviously with deficits and debts the way it is, we aren't leading by example in that regard," Womack said. "The only way to truly force Congress to live within its means is enshrine it in the Constitution."
Hill said the balanced-budget amendment would force Congress to act more responsibly.
"We've tried a number of nonbinding approaches to control public spending," he said. "I believe a balanced-budget amendment, which our states have as a core strategy for expenses not exceeding revenue, is worth advocating for at the federal level."
Hill blamed Senate Democrats for much of the spending increases, saying they would agree to defense spending increases only if they were coupled with increases in domestic spending.
"We're stuck with a broken system," he said.
Westerman said the current levels of deficit spending cannot be sustained.
"Maybe if we could force a balanced-budget amendment, Congress would be forced to balance it," he added.
U.S. Rep. Rick Crawford, a Republican from Jonesboro, could not be reached for comment.
Metro on 04/13/2018