A Balanced Budget Ammendment Is A Terrible Idea

Bobby Jindal attempts to make the case for a federal balanced budget amendment:

"A federal balanced budget amendment. States have balanced budget laws, small businesses have to balance their budgets, and families have to do the same. This is an idea that is supported by virtually every American who does not live in the 202 area code. It’s common sense. It is also laughed at in Washington. When you mention the BBA as a solution, they roll their eyes and write you off as a non-serious person. But the American public is dead serious about it, and they should be."

A federal balanced budget amendment is one of the most popular horrible ideas in political discourse today. You simply cannot compare personal budgets, business budgets, or even state budgets to national budgets in this way. People and businesses can balance their budgets because in doing so they don't also jeopardize their incomes (unlike the government, as can be seen very clearly from the austerity crisis/fiscal cliff). State governments can balance their budgets because they can always count on the federal government to both make up the shortfall. Calling a balanced budget "common sense" shows just how ridiculous the idea of "common sense" can be when applied to counter intuitive fields like this. Americans who are calling for a balanced budget do not truly understand what they are doing. This is evidenced by the fact that so many Americans are so completely ignorant of what is actually in the federal budget. This leaves conservative pundit David Frum to ponder a hypothetical question:

"It would be wonderful to hear Gov. Jindal identify the specific cuts he would have made during the nadir of the recession, when revenues as a share of GDP were around 15%, the lowest since the Second World War. At that point, cutting PBS and foreign aid won't get you to 15%. At 15%, you have to slash entitlements (can't do that!) and the Department of Defense (good luck getting southern senators on board with that!)."

Frum also notes that conservatives can still be conservative without going to such absurd lengths:

"Yes, Washington is too bloated. Yes, Washington is trying to do too many things it should leave to private citizens and state governments. Yes, Washington should be aiming to leave the federal government's share of GDP near the historical norm of 18-20 percent. And yes, I too am concerned by Ezra Klein's warning that 18 percent won't be able to pay for our existing and future obligations. We have to address these problems, and as conservatives, we must work to restrain the federal government from consuming an ever larger share of the gross domestic product.

But you don't win elections by promising to cut benefits, retard growth, and paralyze government when it is needed most -- during the depths of recessions. That's a terrible electoral strategy, but it's also horrible leadership from a party elite. Gov. Jindal can unload all the populist rhetoric he'd like, but he's as elite as anyone in Washington, DC, and that role comes with obligations."

No doubt the left has quite a few bad ideas as well. But that does not excuse the right from avoiding the most important responsibilities expected of an elected politician:

"Endorsing a balanced budget amendment, laughing off the uncertainty of messing with the debt ceiling, and deriding efforts to keep our nation functioning is an abdication of those responsibilities. I hope we see better in the future from Gov. Jindal."