Senate rejects balanced-budget amendments

Well, we demand it specifically.

It's in their own best interests not to tie their hands with a balanced budget amendment. The control of the purse strings is why lobbyists shower them with perks and why pork wins them perks in their home districts. If they place a spending cap on themselves, they won't get as many perks. They will only act once their prospects of re-election are at stake.

 

All the more reason to turn the BBA over to the people to decide. It kinda irks me that Congress sees fit to prevent us from doing so...

 

we do that in November when we eliminate theirs

 

I can tell you first hand from gerrymandered California, the first thing we need to do is fix the districting. In 2006 there were 183 state house seats up for election. Not a single one changed the butt sitting in it. Myself I think we need to get the money out in the District level first. Ban ALL earmarks. That would prevent those jaboiks from flooding their district with taxpayers cash in order to get re-elected regardless of their voting record. That would be a great start.

 

How can they buy themselves re-election if they cannot print money and spend it on handouts without limits?

That is the only reason they don't support a BBA.

This sums up the entire problem with the US political system.