BEWARE of the trickery behind a “balanced budget” amendment!
By Publius Huldah
Our federal Constitution is one of enumerated powers only. If you spend 20 minutes to read through the entire Constitution and highlight all the powers delegated to Congress and the President, you will get a complete list of the objects on which Congress is authorized to spend money. THAT is how our Framers controlled federal spending. If it’s on the list of delegated powers, Congress may lawfully spend money on it. But if it’s not on the list, Congress may not lawfully spend money on it.
Few people know of the existence of this list of delegated powers – no one in Congress seems to be aware of it. Most of what Congress spends money on is not on the list.
The solution is to downsize the federal government back to the powers on the list.
All versions of a balanced budget amendment (BBA) fundamentally change the constitutional design – they create a new standard for spending: They change the constitutional standard for spending FROM whether the object is on the list TO a limit on total spending – where Congress may lawfully spend money on whatever they want.
To add insult to injury, the limits on spending are fictitious because the limits can be waived whenever the government votes to waive them.
So a BBA does nothing to reduce federal spending.
Why the push for a BBA? Because a BBA transforms our federal government FROM one of limited and narrowly defined enumerated powers – the items on the list – TO one of general and unlimited powers. This is because a BBA permits Congress to spend money on WHATEVER they want.
God gave you a brain. You have a moral obligation to use it. Look behind the curtain those agitating for an Art. V convention have put up.
And learn what’s on the list.
Share this:
25 Comments »
Leave a comment
PUBLIUS HULDAH
Publius-Huldah's Blog 
Cool post! Your thoughts about the delegated powers and the fundamental change in terms of Congressional powers that a BBA would signify is very interesting. Thanks for sharing.
LikeLike
Thank you!
LikeLike
Good morning PH,
You’ve convinced me. I just Tweeted this post and will be linking to it at Blogspot and LJ.
I’m wondering…do you take the time to use Freedomworks or Freedom Connector? If so, under what name?
PK
LikeLike
Thank you, Priscilla! I am honored.
Re Freedomworks or Freedom connector – I am such a novice when it comes to the internet…. by the time I finally get something figured out, they update it so I am always baffled about the internet.
But if you think I should use it tell me what to do.
LikeLike
Hi PH
Something to consider:
“Christians…have seen things in bits and pieces… permissiveness, pornography, the public schools, the breakdown of the family, and finally abortion… instead of totals …They have not seen this as a totality–a shift in the world view — that is,…a fundamental change in the overall way people think and view the world and whole life as a whole.” Francis A. Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto, 1982.
LikeLike
I suggest the blindness is willful; for if the Christians acknowledged the import of these things, they would have to do something about it. And THAT, they are too cowardly to do. So, best just to sit back and wait to be raptured out of here.
LikeLike
Good morning PH
Re: “I suggest the blindness is willful; for if the Christians acknowledged the import of these things, they would have to do something about it. And THAT, they are too cowardly to do. So, best just to sit back and wait for the rapture.”
Just so I am clear:
1. On what basis do you make the accusation that Christians are willfully blind, lack courage, etc. and that has anything to do with the Biblical doctrine of the Rapture?
2. What is it that you are suggesting, conversely, is actually the Christian’s primary duty in our time, and on what basis do you say that?
Thanks
God bless
MCE
LikeLike
1. What Frances Schaffer says is true. Right? You must think so, b/c you posted his quote.
2. Christians – who have been the overwhelming majority in this Country – haven’t stopped the takeover of our once Christian culture.
3. The Rapture Doctrine encourages Christians to surrender the World which God made and said was Good to evil.
If I were evil and wanted to neutralize Christians and make them TOTALLY ineffective – TO STRIP THEM OF THEIR SALT AND LIGHT – I would concoct a theory that takeover by evil is inevitable but they don’t need to worry about it b/c they are going to be raptured out of here any day now – certainly before the shtf. And while they are sitting around with their hands folded waiting to be rescued, they can pat themselves on the back for being oh! so spiritual and “above” all the mundane problems of this world. Problems which grew and grew and grew b/c they refused to do anything about them. And of course, they mustn’t do anything to risk their church’s 501 (c) (3) tax status.
Cowards. Passivity enshrined to virtue. The blood is on their hands.
Manly men and womanly women fight evil.
LikeLike
Hi PH
Hope you are having a good weekend.
Re: “What Frances Schaffer says is true. Right? You must think so, b/c you posted his quote.”
I did indeed offer that, and for good reason. I trust you appreciate that as best I can I am asking you to offer and defend your solutions to the underlying cause(s) of the evil, depravity, etc. that we face in our nation in this day. To use a homely analogy, we have all been up to our neck in alligators, the specifics), but at some point the swamp must be drained (the causes dealt with) for the swamp is where the alligators live and breed. Hence….
Re: “Bah! Manly men and womanly women fight evil.”
“Fight” is easy enough to say, but I am asking for specifics as to just how PH is defining “the good fight” that you say we should be waging and are not.
Just to make this easy, assume for a moment that there was no such thing as 501 (c) (3) etc and everything was legal. What are you maintaining the church should be doing to nullify the evil we see in our nation? If you will, please explain why what ever that is would deal with the root cause of the issue rather than simply hit or miss.
Thanks
God bless
MCE
LikeLike
I am trying to understand where you are coming from. Are you saying
(1) You don’t know how to fight?
(2) The Marxists, Progs, Humanists, and Muslims taking over our Country can not be resisted – it’s not possible to resist?
(3) God wants them to take over our Country?
(4) Nice people don’t resist evil people?
(5) As a general principle: good Christians should submit to evil?
(6) We should make no effort to address the bad philosophy which has swept over our land? I addressed part of the problem here: https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/marco-rubio-and-the-anti-constitutionalism-and-intellectual-moral-bankruptcy-of-our-time-3/
(7) Something else? What?
LikeLike
Good afternoon PH
For some reason I could not reply directly to your most current response. Sorry.
Re: I am trying to understand where you are coming from. Are you saying:
(1) You don’t know how to fight?
(2) The Marxists, Progs, Humanists, and Muslims taking over our Country can not be resisted – it’s not possible to resist?
(3) God wants them to take over our Country?
(4) Nice people don’t resist evil people?
(5) As a general principle: good Christians should submit to evil?
(6) We should make no effort to address the bad philosophy which has swept over our land? I addressed part of the problem here:
That helps. Of course I am not saying anything of the sort…not even a little. Never have. Never will.
What I am asking you now is, since you have made some accusations against Christians that seem to assume what you have just asked me, WHAT are you saying Christians need to be ultimately fighting that is the root of it all? What should they stop doing or begin doing, etc.? I refer you again to the statement of Francis Schaeffer:
“Christians…have seen things in bits and pieces… permissiveness, pornography, the public schools, the breakdown of the family, and finally abortion… instead of totals …They have not seen this as a totality–a shift in the world view — that is,…a fundamental change in the overall way people think and view the world and whole life as a whole.” Francis A. Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto, 1982.
Schaeffer is describing, to use a medical analogy, a disease (the totality) that has a wide number of symptoms (the bits and pieces). I am asking what you are saying is that totality / disease that Christians are supposed to be fighting.
Now, for illustration purposes, allow me to continue the medical analogy.
Years ago I worked on an ambulance and was called to assist a person who was complaining of abdominal discomfort. His wife had called because the man insisted he simply had indigestion.
When we arrived I found him on the couch and before him on the coffee table was Rolaids, Mylanta, Maalox, Alka Seltzer, and a number of other nausea and indigestion type OTC remedies. I asked simply if these were helping and he said “No—they are all old.”
What had escaped this man, who was treating the symptoms which he self diagnosed as indigestion, was that a great number of pending heart attacks present with precisely the same symptoms he was trying to treat to no avail. Note clearly that he WAS FIGHTING—just not the real problem.
PH–the man’s problem was not indigestion. he was fighting indigestion but he was NOT fighting the actual issue. In a sense, his fight was nothing more than shadow-boxing. The fact is, he was having a heart attack. Continuing the “fight” based on his self diagnosis might well have cost him his life.
So, that i was I am asking. What do you say we are actually fighting–the totality?
Any good and honest person can see the symptoms…my question is for your actual diagnosis of the actual disease–in our discussion, the root cause of the symptoms we see and that you describe.
God bless
MCE
LikeLike
If our government were following the Constitution the budget would be balanced.
LikeLike
So true, Henry! If you read thru the Constitution and highlight the powers delegated to Congress and the President, you will be AMAZED at how short is the list of delegated powers. Other than wars, it should cost very little to run the federal government. And if we restricted our military activities to defense only, the military wouldn’t cost so much. We still need to keep up with the military technology, and have people constantly trained to use it; but if we stopped going to war to protect economic interests, it would all cost much less. And think of all the lives saved.
LikeLike
Which BBA are you referring to? I’d like to confirm your warning.
LikeLike
Rob John, I’ve written about several different versions of the BBA – You can find my 5 or 6 papers on this topic under the Category “Balanced Budget Amendment” on my home page. But all versions of the BBA are essentially the same. My paper on Mark Levin’s “liberty Amendments” briefly discusses his version of the BBA.
Compact for America’s (Nick Dranias) version of a BBA has a sneaky provision which would permit Congress to impose a national sales or VAT tax in addition to the income tax.
LikeLike
I have an Idea, Lets continue to let the government go unchecked making laws that are not constitutional, regulations that take on the form of laws, continue allowing SCOTUS to make ruling that have nothing to do with the Constitution, and allow the POTUS to enforce only those laws he agrees with. This lets all continue to let this run-a-way government trample and make changes in the form of non ratified amendments to the constitution. Lets continue to ignore all the executive orders that reduce or do away with our freedoms and liberties. Lets continue to be apathetic at the elections. Lets make all immigrants whither they are legal or illegal citizens right now and put millions on or our welfare system. Let continue to listen to Publius Huldah a let this country continue the slide to Socialism and become the largest most modern 3 world nation in the world.
How can you in your right mind continue to listen to this nonsense when we are loosing our constitution right before our very eyes? How can you ever think the people are suddenly going to start watching this government and holding them accountable? How can you ever think the voters of this nation will ever vote to remove those Senators and Congressmen that have been in office for more than 12 years. Do you really believe that PH has the answers.
I say she does not, you must remember it was less than 10 percent of the nation at the time of the American Revolution that participated in the revolution. We have 66 % of the nation wanting term limits on our federally elected officials as well as the supreme court and the federal courts. The speed of how fast this congress and government are eroding our freedoms and liberties is and re-writing our constitution should disturb every citizen and shake them to their core. This government is changing our Constitution and doing it in such a manor the States are not being ask to ratify their changes.
So I ask why are you fighting against the Citizens for Self Governance and the Convention of States Project? You continue to do what you are doing which by the way really is nothing and within the next 5 years we will no longer have a country or a constitution. So keep going Publius Huldah Hoo Rah for you maybe you will get exactly what your want, the destruction of our Country and the Constitution. so keep it, your doing a wonderful job, but you need to tell the truth and just tell everyone what you really want and that is a shooting revolution, you want 3 million of your friends to march on Washington and remove every politician and start all over. No problem if some are casualties or how do they say that Collateral Damage?
Come on get real it is time to join the Convention of States Project and call for a Limited Amending Convention of the States to rein in the Power and Jurisdiction of the Federal Government and apply Term Limits to all elected and non-elected officials in Washington D.C.
LikeLike
Above is the fruit of public education in America.
Tom Dowdy hasn’t a clue about the logical fallacy of “false dichotomy”.
LikeLike
Though I disagree with PH on the CoS, this is a very well thought out piece, with which I agree 100%.
Beyond its spending habits, most of what the Federal government DOES is extra-constitutional.
I don’t know how to do that, outside of what amounts to a civil war.
LikeLike
Dear Engineer,
Fact: The federal government, the State governments & The People all ignore the federal Constitution we have.
Question: But they will all obey amendments which restrict the federal government because……… [fill in the blank] ………..
LikeLike
Good morning PH
Re: “Why the push for a BBA? Because a BBA transforms our federal government FROM one of limited and narrowly defined enumerated powers TO one of general and unlimited powers.”
A fundamental transformation indeed.
Perhaps worst of all, the BBA removes from the people’s House, that body that changes every 2 years, the power of the purse. As it stands now, the people can, at least theoretically, quickly exercise their power and bring a halt to things by making a change in the House. With the BBA, the ultimate issue rests in the Courts—obviously NOT where we want things to be decided.
I surmise that the “fundamental transformation” you speak of is this transfer of power from the people to the government once and for all.
Personally, I have yet to hear a good argument as to why anyone would expect Congress to observe the Constitution after all these amendments when they do not observe it now, or better, where they twist and distort it to suit their own ends.
God bless
MCE
“The thought of modern industry in the hands of Christian charity is a dream worth dreaming. The thought of industry in the hands of paganism is a nightmare beyond imagining. The choice between the two is upon us.” –Theodore Roosevelt, 1909.
LikeLike
“fundamentally transforms the constitutional design” humm – I think those words came from you. As you see, I use them b/c they are true and effective.
Convention supporters have no answer as to why Congress would obey any amendments which actually restricted the feds. So they SMEAR people who point this out.
LikeLike
Good morning PH
Re: “fundamental transformation”
One real issue in our nation is that great numbers of people read that phrase, “fundamental transformation,” quite differently. One sees it as a positive while the other sees it as a negative.
On the one hand there are those who understand that our nation was created distinct and unique by those with genius in a unique situation, and that the phrase “fundamental transformation” means our nation as designed will no longer exist–ie it has been corrupted, degraded, dying, perversion, etc…all the descriptors we normally use for what is happening. That group’s aim is to restore the purity of it by getting rid of the contaminant. For this group, “fundamental transformation” means illness, even death.
On the other hand, we have truly vast numbers of people who believe the contradictory, that our nation was not truly the product of someone but rather of blind evolutionary forces in play at the time, forces still in play. For them, “fundamental transformation” simply continues that process into something even better–ie Hegelian Dialectic, etc. They desire to continue the evolutionary process, even promote it, into the next true form by adding more of the transformative element, or at least “making peace” with opposing elements.
I am constantly amazed at just where this latter view shows up.
These are contradictions–no middle ground and both cannot be so. The “house” is divided against itself….” and you know the rest. It must ultimately become “all one thing or the other.”
God bless
MCE
LikeLike
Very perceptive, as usual. It is true that among the leaders pushing for a convention are those who:
1)Seek to radically transform our country into a Marxist Dictatorship: These include the supporters of the already prepared and waiting (1) “Constitution for the Newstates of America”, (2) the “Constitution for The New Socialist Republic in North America”, and (3) the Marxist Constitution George Soros, Marxist law professors all over the Country, Cass Sunstein & Eric Holder support [I haven’t seen the one they want – it may be the same as the Constitution for The New Socialist Republic in North America, or it might be a different one.] You can read the texts of the first two proposed Constitutions here: http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/concon/newstates.htm#.Vbpaa_lNqSd and here: http://revcom.us/socialistconstitution/SocialistConstitution-en.pdf Here is the website of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA http://revcom.us/socialistconstitution/index2.html
2) Others pushing for a convention seems to want to “make peace” with the opposing elements by legalizing what has already been done. In this regard, the amendments proposed by Randy Barnett (law professor), Mark Levin, and Michael Farris would all legalize powers the feds have already usurped. Although I suspect Michael Farris wants an entirely new Constitution which moves America into the New World Order where rights are granted, regulated, and withdrawn at the pleasure of government.
But there are also The Folks who have been deceived by the foregoing “fundamental transformers” and thus believe that the remedy when the federal and state governments ignore the Constitution is to change the Constitution. After all, it is SO DIFFICULT to find out what is – and is what is not – on the list of delegated powers. So we need amendments to make it clear. Apparently, one has to be possessed of rare genius to be able to read thru our Constitution and highlight the powers delegated to Congress and the President. I always thought an 8th grader ought to be able to do it – but since so few have done it, I must have been wrong.
LikeLike
Good morning PH
Re: “I always thought an 8th grader ought to be able to do it – but since so few have done it, I must have been wrong.”
Not at all, as long as you include the fact that the 8th grade you went to is NOT the same 8th grade our children have been going to for several generations.
I am confident in saying that when you learned to read and study something you focused on discerning the author’s meaning—right? For that you studied the context, the words, the thoughts, the logic, etc.
Well, today that is hardly the case. Today the emphasis is NOT on discernign the author’s meaning but the meaning of the written piece to the reader, and note: that “meaning” can be as varied as there are readers, even contradictory. They are ALL considered valid. The ONE thing not considered valid is to insist that someone’s meaning is incorrect.
This distinction was brilliantly illustrated by Christ as building on “Rock” and “sand.”
One will stand and the other never will.
God bless
MCE
LikeLike
True. A friend remembers his high school English class during 1960 or so. The teacher asked the students to read a story. Then asked each student to say what the story meant …. to him. My friend said, “it doesn’t matter what it means to me – what matters is what the author meant”. The teacher was not pleased. And thus, that teacher – who doubtless had no idea of the damage she was doing, as she was just following her teachers’ manual – helped destroy the concept that we must read every text for its OBJECTIVE MEANING. And I expect the other students have no idea what was done to them.
In “The Abolition of Man”, C.S. Lewis shows how the minds of British school children were destroyed by their teachers.
I suspect GOD actually knew what He was doing when He said it is the Parents’ responsibility to educate their children.
LikeLike