Balanced Budget Amendment
- Share via
The concept of a balanced budget amendment seems to be getting far more attention than it deserves lately (May 21). Though it may sound like a cure-all, in the long run, it wouldn’t curb spending. In order for Congress to meet this amendment every year, it would do the two things we hate most--cut decent programs or raise taxes.
Why not instead propose an amendment limiting federal spending to a certain percentage of the GNP? In addition to curbing taxes relative to our ability to pay, by forcing government programs to compete for survival (instead of drone-like expansion), some parts of government might actually become efficient.
Any limitations that may arise could be handled with a clause that allows for a two-thirds override in times of crisis. This would seem to be a far better alternative.
JOHN TREADWELL, San Diego
More to Read
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
The latest effort is coming from the L.A. County Board of Supervisors. They just announced a $3 million program in conjunction with some nonprofits groups to test and clean the soil at homes still standing in the areas impacted by the Eaton Fire.
California once bet big on offshore wind to help power its clean-energy future, but the Trump administration is now paying developers billions to walk away from their projects. As California’s remaining offshore-wind leases hang in the balance, the state is fighting back in court.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
