Balance the federal budget. Enough of the borrowing money to pay for programs that may not be effective or useful.
If a balanced budget isn’t passed, the seated members of Congress can’t run for re-election.
1 Like
I’m not sure how to achieve a balanced federal budget, but once it’s established, it could be structured as a “Budget Reallocation Bucket.” Under this system, the total budget is fixed, and any new spending must be offset by adjustments to existing allocations.
For example, if there are four programs, each receiving 25% of the budget, and a new proposal arises—such as improving the electrical grid at a cost of 1% of the total budget—then adjustments would be made to accommodate the new expense. However, some budget items may be fixed or non-negotiable and cannot be reduced. These programs would retain their original funding levels, while the remaining flexible programs would be reduced proportionally to cover the cost of the new initiative.
This approach ensures fiscal responsibility while allowing flexibility to address new priorities, like building the electrical grid, without exceeding the established budget.
A balanced budget is a must. However, until the $31 Trillion in government debt is paid off, the budget should be set to 10% less than the tax revenues with the rest going to pay off the debt. When the debt is gone then the budget can equal tax revenues although I suggest some hold back for a rainy day.
I would propose a National Budget Vote {NVB}. A pass/fail vote by the American voter. We will never get them to control the spending as that is where they derive their power and control. I see it working like this and in this format. The proposed budget is 7 trillion, 5 trillion from revenue and 2 trillion from deficit spending. The current budget is 6 trillion, 5 trillion from revenue and 1 trillion from deficit spending. If the proposed budget does not pass by popular vote, then the current budget is the next fiscal period budget. This is the most democratic way to give “we the people” our power back and control the power of the purse. A two yr budget would coincide nicely with our election cycle. While we don’t vote on where the money goes, the politician will have to “sell” their voters on how they want them to vote based on the programs they push. Or why, to not vote for the new budget. This would bring a lot of transparency to the fed’s spending. This would require a Constitutional Amendment or Convention of States Article V to get put in place. I see no other way we will ever get control of fed spending.
1 Like
The issue with “balance the budget” is that there are no limits. The federal government has the ability to raise income taxes and print money (taxation by economy). They’re like teenagers given free access to their parents good credit and they’re running it into the ground for generations to come.
What we REALLY need is Federal Fiscal Restraints! Via fiscal restraints, the amounts of taxes collected and the amount spent can be wisely restrained based on national GDP and current debt—you know… smart decisions, like those we make in our household to be sure we can put food on the table, even after paying taxes.
The States created the federal government with the creation of the Constitution in 1787. The States provided a way for the States to continue checking the federal government via an Article V convention. There is currently an application for an Article V convention which includes fiscal restraints. 19 States have agreed to call this convention, but Article V is clear that 2/3rds of the States must agree. So, 15 more must agree. How do States decide to agree? Well, their constituents content their legislators and politely demands them to pass the bill and file it with Congress. You can see if your state has passed the bill, then sign the petition and continue to discuss with your legislators until it’s done. COSAction
Transparency for this would go a long way. Lets force a mandate line item by line item where the money specifically goes each quarter or even less to help keep politicians accountable. It won’t solve every problem but it makes no sense that politicians have no oversight on taxpayer’s money.