The Soap Opera Just Got Very Exciting: Eric Cantor Will Propose Balanced Budget Amendment To US Constitution

Tyler Durden's picture

Well now things are really getting downright exciting:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) today issued the following statement regarding House consideration of a balanced budget amendment, H.J. Res. 1, sponsored by Congressman Bob Goodlatte:

“We are being asked by the Obama Administration to approve a debt limit increase. While President Obama inherited a bad economy, his overspending and failure to enact pro-growth policies have made it worse and now our national debt is currently more than $14 trillion. House Republicans have made clear that we will not agree to raise the debt limit without real spending cuts and binding budget process reforms to ensure that we don’t continue to max out the credit card. One option to ensure that we begin to get our fiscal house in order is a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, and I expect to schedule such a measure for the House to consider during the week of July 25th. I have no doubt that my Republican colleagues will overwhelmingly support this common sense measure and I urge Democrats to as well in order to get our fiscal house in order."

As a reminder, while in the US most states have mandatory balanced budgets, the same is not true for the Federal government (a fact that US bankers slaughter calves to daily, out of gratitude that they can plunder future generations' cash flows while converting the NPV into non-extradition islands in French Polynesia complete with thermoregulated gold and Chateau Lafite 1990 cellars).

Should this law pass, it will mean that QE is the only option for future growth, as this will mean a dead end for debt funded deficit spending. Yes, it will benefit bonds since the US will finally start getting its insolvent fiscal house in order, and result in an epic collapse in stocks.

The soap opera just got exciting again.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Lazarus Long's picture

we have a balanced budget amendment right now its called the debt limit. don't raise the debt limit the budget is balanced. this is just BS for the masses to fight over till the music stops.

bbq on whitehouse lawn's picture

Yep. That would do it. Cheers.

Oh-bye-the-way congresscritter you have 100k people in your district out of a job and outside your door.  Seems your districts, former TSA employees would like to screen you (for your safety) before you talk with your constituency.

Happy trails.


Old Poor Richard's picture

Yup.  Holding the line on the debt ceiling balances the budget, just like that. JUST DO IT.

Wait for Cantor to introduce the "Balanced Budget Amendement" that flounders and dies just like the ERA, meanwhile boosting the debt limit 4 trillion here, 4 trillion there in order to continue funding welfare for the banksters and the military industrial complex--promising the balanced budget any year now...

blunderdog's picture

What's so patently transparent about this ploy is that the Feds haven't paid any fucking attention to the Constitution for decades, now we're supposed to care about some asshole's claim that if they add an amendment, they'll obey it.

How stupid could people be to care about this?  I mean really...

Yeah, that balanced-budget amendment'll be just as respected the 1st, the 2nd, the 4th, the 10th, etc etc etc etc.....

It's so funny I'm crying.

tarsubil's picture

You just see things for the way they are. No need to apologize.

When Republicans start talking about being fiscally conservative, I just hear a bunch of farts and shit.

HungrySeagull's picture



Me too.


And I am falling over the coffee this morning.

BillyTheBlade's picture

The debt ceiling balances the governments budget just as my credit card limit balances my budget.

Popo's picture

Exactly.  The debt limit should provide all the limits to budget that we need. File this under "circus" with the rest of government regulation.

Is the banking cartel still winning?   Yes.  

Next subject please.

Doode's picture

Budget can and should be unbalanced during the extraordinary events in history - WW2, severe recession etc. I want to see the exact wording otherwise the country might never be able to fight another real war and deal with worldwide catastrophies if the amendment is done wrong.

blunderdog's picture

I agree with this personally, I'd be vehemently opposed to a balanced budget amendment if I believed in a single iota of anything the Feds do these days.

But I don't.  They can pass an amendment that declares us all wards of the state for all I care.

Law which can't be enforced doesn't exist.  Members of Congress will probably be the last guys on the planet to realize they're no longer "in power."

Bad Lieutenant's picture

Yeah, agreed.  I don't see how they can reduce the amendment into something that leaves legit borrowing open without the whitehouse and/or congress being able to invoke exemption whenever they feel like it.  For example, we declared war on Libya right?  How about Iraq in the early stages.  Same thing except now that we'll just have Cheney 2.0 saying that we don't need to adhere to that budget amendment for the 'safety and security of the US' or however they decide to craft the language so they can exempt the amendment.

However, the real elephant in the room is that the deficit is currently 1.4 trillion give or take.  A balanced budget, as the zh commentary notes, would buckle equities.  I think this one sentence comment is a little underplayed.  Let's be honest and realize the kind of crash we'd see in cyclic-related asset prices let alone employment rates etc.  I don't see how the (banking) powers that be would let this thing even come close to passing.  I'm not saying the path we're on now is any better (on the contrary, we're of course setting the global economy for a crisis of biblical proportions), just that these congre$$people put up a show fighting over 10 or 20 billion here and there and now they're going to find $1.4 trillion to cut?

knowless's picture

sorry to piggyback so far up with OT comment, but;

NPR is soliciting questions regarding the debt ceiling debate, go here:


put "debt ceiling" in the subject line, they are trying to formulate a show for next week based on user comments, critical mass on this could be useless or hilarious, you be the judges.



BillyTheBlade's picture

agreed, but the way around the ammendment would be for the government to constantly maintain crises that "wouldnt allow for a balanced budget", therefore making the amendment as moot as "No State shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts". 

topcallingtroll's picture

That would be really cool if we couldnt fight another war. Let the zionists fight their own wars and not drag us into it anymore!

World catastrophe? Let the rest of the world bear the brunt of it. Why should we always pay for everything?

Doode's picture

Make sure the next catastrophy gets your memo not to affect the US either directly or otherwise!

SMG's picture

Not Zionists, Illuminati.  Different religions.  Different people.

It would be great if we didn't have to fight anymore wars.  but I fear we are being set up for a large "useless eater" depopulating war with China and the like.

If a pitchfork and torch brigade ever gets going. The Illuminati (in the US people like Rockefeller, Mellon, Federal Reserve)  will be the people to go after.

BTW Do you enjoy working for people who ultimatly want to kill you and use the world resources for their own?

legal eagle's picture

Confident the GOP wants a balanced budget. LMFAO. Do we remember what GW Bush-wacked did to fiscal policy? Give me a fucking break. The problem is Neither party has a monopoly on Bullshit. Boehner voted For how many debt ceiling hikes? How many deficit budgets? Yeah, that is what I thought.

TX-Mike's picture

WOOT..!  It will fail, but we should line up behind it regardless..  I'm calling my congressman tomorrow!


Rainman's picture the call....even if approved these fukkers would redefine " balanced budget ". Deposit this in the theater file.

AbandonShip's picture

Agree, they'll invent some off-balance sheet category that "doesn't really count" and stuff everything in the basement/attic.  Still, this deserves support.  It's in the right direction.

Hephasteus's picture

Dissolve the fed. Screw off the bullshit never ending "interest" or it means nothing. It'll become clear that people are only here for providing free energy and "accepting" authority.

Whalley World's picture

I am sure if she could vote on it, Sarah Palin would "refudiate" the proposition.

Calmyourself's picture

Obama would of course properly refute it.  Of course he would then promptly bow to it within the borders of all 57 states..

nmewn's picture

...the teleprompter made me do it!...LOL!

qussl3's picture

I dare you.

I double dare you back!

alien-IQ's picture

Hmmm...July 25...that should give them enough time to actually READ THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION and realize how many things they are currently doing now that violate it.

but I digress...

Re-Discovery's picture

ummm . . . the Constitution was adopted in 1787 . . so maybe the folks saying read the Constitution should ALSO read the Constitution.

treasurefish's picture

...ummm, yourself!!!


"1776 is the answer for 1984!" ~Alex Jones


So maybe the know-it-alls should not jump to ASS-U-ME (love that word)!

Re-Discovery's picture

God, get it right.

Especially if you quote it.

"The answer to 1984 is 1776" 

And dont give me this '+1776' answer refers to this.  It would make no sense if it did.  This was an 'a' and 'b' post, so 'c' your way out.

Shell Game's picture

Relax, R-D, that's some real knit-picking girly chit..

Cassandra Syndrome's picture

Like those who debase the currency should fry for their sins?

There's a Keynesian electric stimulus package for Krugman to glibfully write about in the New Dork Times.

yabyum's picture

"pro growth policy"= tax cuts for the hyper wealthy.

carbonmutant's picture

Janet the Neapolitan seems to be the only one in the current administration that has a use for the constitution.

binky's picture

George W. Bush once said (in the presence of 4 republican senators), "Stop waving the Constitution in my face. It's just a Goddamned piece of paper". For a few, fleeting, transitory moments of bucolic glory, he spoke the truth and became a genuine scholar. 


Then thirty seconds passed and he was right back where he started.

Calmyourself's picture

I have seen that stated as fact several times, any evidence of this occurring perhaps?

JLee2027's picture

It never occurred, just a rumor started and perpetuated by the left.

So Close's picture

Can't wait to see how this plays out.  It goes right to the meat of this issue at hand.  And so I must predict.. Fail.

So Close's picture

However.. this might have legs... and we can all legally feel better about going down the tubes....

Ron Paul and Barney Frank co-sponser a bill to end the prohibition on Pot.


Rainman's picture

Finally they see there's a pot of pot at the end of the rainbow. Legalize and put a solidarity levy on it !!

SWRichmond's picture

Eric Cantor is born-again Tea Party.  That's the funniest fucking thing I've heard tonight.

Flakmeister's picture

Nothing worse than a reformed whore....

treemagnet's picture

Since this is what I really want, this is what cannot occur.

Nels's picture

Why is this what you want?  What does it give us that is more than the current debt limit law?  Theoretically, we are already in a situation that requires a balanced budget, as they aren't allowed to borrow.

This is just smoke and mirrors, bait and switch.  The trade-off for simply allowing voting on this amendment (which won't finish for years, as the states take their time ratifying it) will be a higher debt limit, kicking the can further down the road.

treemagnet's picture

If it kills this ponzi I'm for it - yes, I must assume things, but you're taking me outta context - we want the same thing.  Its called wishful thinking, I allow myself a little once in awhile.