Dear Representative:

On behalf of the millions of members and supporters of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, I am writing to urge you to vote against H. J. Res. 139, a resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States purportedly requiring a balanced budget for the federal government.

Although H. J. Res. 139 is labeled a “Balanced Budget Amendment”, in fact it is no such thing.  A balanced budget is not required by the language in the resolution.  Instead, H. J. Res. 139 imposes a limitation on federal spending – a “cap” – that requires a two-thirds supermajority of both the House and Senate to overcome, except in the case of a declaration of war.  Increasing taxes also requires a two-thirds supermajority vote in both houses, while cutting taxes does not.  This could easily allow Congress to repeatedly cut taxes with a simple one-vote majority, forcing draconian cuts in all federal spending that could not muster the supermajorities in both houses to overcome, while still leaving the federal budget out of balance in perpetuity. While the resolution does not dictate any particular approach to deficit reduction, by altering established Congressional voting procedures to facilitate cutting taxes above all other priorities except spending on declared wars, it increases the likelihood that the fiscal policies adopted in coming decades will favor the well-off at the expense of middle- and low-income Americans.

  1. J. Res. 139 would severely limit Social Security and Medicare Part A from drawing down Trust Fund reserves to pay retirement, disability and survivor benefits and hospitalization costs, since all federal expenditures, including these earned benefits, would have to be limited to an average of the revenue collected in the previous three years, adjusted for population growth and inflation. H. J. Res. 139 would also require draconian spending cuts of such a magnitude that policymakers would be forced to severely slash Medicare Parts B, C and D; Medicaid, and many other programs while opening the door to massive new tax cuts. Even Social Security benefits would be at risk, as the spending cap makes no distinction between spending to pay earned benefits versus other types of spending.  The limitations on the redemption of Trust Fund assets would force Congress to either immediately cut benefits or further squeeze other programs important to seniors to make up the difference.  At the same time, it would make it very difficult to achieve balance through revenue raisers such as tax increases.

The National Committee supports responsible government budgeting. However, we oppose a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution because it would significantly harm the economy, result in a government default and force severe cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and other vital federal programs. We especially oppose H. J. Res. 139, which purports to require a balanced budget but, in reality, locks into the United States Constitution a preference for cutting taxes above all other fiscal priorities of the United States, including honoring our nation’s commitments to America’s seniors.  We urge all members of Congress to vote no on this dangerous way to address the federal government’s long-term fiscal challenges.

Sincerely,

Max Richtman
President and CEO