Eleanor Finch
The Compact for America (CFA) is an initiative that proposes a constitutional convention to introduce a balanced budget amendment (BBA) to the US Constitution. The goal is to force the federal government to balance its budget every year, which could result in massive budget cuts. Critics argue that the CFA's BBA does nothing to curb Congress's unconstitutional spending habits and could lead to an increase in the federal debt limit. The CFA convention also poses a risk of damaging the Constitution by allowing Congress to spend money on anything, regardless of its constitutionality, as long as it does not exceed the limits set in the BBA.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Constitutional Convention | The Compact for America Initiative proposes a constitutional convention that could damage the existing constitution. |
| Spending Limits | The Compact for America's Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) does not restore the concept of enumerated powers, allowing Congress to spend money on anything as long as it does not exceed the BBA limits. |
| State Representation | The Compact for America Initiative's convention in 2013 included delegates from all 50 states, with 38 states represented by their governors and the remaining by state-appointed delegates. |
| Interstate Compacts | The Compact for America lists 208 interstate compacts as evidence of their usefulness, but none of these change the existing constitution. |
Explore related products
$9.99 $9.99
What You'll Learn
- The Compact for America Initiative's constitutional convention poses a high risk of damaging the Constitution
- The Compact for America's Balanced Budget Amendment does not restore the concept of enumerated powers
- The Compact for America's budget-balancing scheme could allow Congress to spend on unconstitutional projects
- The Compact for America's constitutional convention could have potentially Constitution-threatening side effects
- The Compact for America's constitutional amendment could cause economic damage and job losses
The Compact for America Initiative's constitutional convention poses a high risk of damaging the Constitution
The Compact for America Initiatives constitutional convention poses a high risk of damaging the Constitution. The Compact for America Initiative (CFA) is composed of three parts: Firstly, a multi-state compact petitions Congress to convene a constitutional convention, or "con-con", with state governors of member states serving as delegates. Secondly, a balanced budget amendment (BBA) as defined by the CFA would be added to the Constitution. Thirdly, a congressional resolution would call a constitutional convention when and if 38 states join the CFA compact.
The CFA's constitutional convention is a threat to the Constitution because there is no way to ensure that the assembled delegates representing the people would not exceed their mandate to propose a BBA. Even if they adhered to the mandate, there is no guarantee that the CFA's BBA would improve America's financial prospects. The CFA's proposed BBA could alter the balance of power between the federal government and state governments, which requires explicit congressional consent.
The CFA's constitutional convention is not the only way to address these issues. There are already remedies available, such as the election of representatives committed to controlling spending according to existing constitutional limits, and nullification. These remedies do not carry the same risk of damaging the Constitution as the CFA's convention.
Furthermore, the CFA's convention is unnecessary because the Constitution already provides for a process of constitutional amendment. Article V of the Constitution outlines the steps required to amend the Constitution, and this process has been used successfully in the past. The CFA's convention could circumvent this established process and set a dangerous precedent for future amendments.
In conclusion, the Compact for America Initiatives constitutional convention poses a high risk of damaging the Constitution. There are alternative solutions to the issues the CFA aims to address, and the CFA's convention could set a dangerous precedent by circumventing the established process of constitutional amendment.
Ohio vs US Constitution: What's the Difference?
You may want to see also
The Compact for America's Balanced Budget Amendment does not restore the concept of enumerated powers
The Compact for America's Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) is a proposed amendment to the US Constitution that would require a balanced budget. The BBA would prohibit the US government's total outlays from exceeding total receipts at any point in time. While the BBA aims to address the nation's fiscal problems and restore fiscal discipline, it does not restore the concept of enumerated powers outlined in the Constitution.
The concept of "limited government" or "enumerated powers" was intended to check the growth of the public sector and limit federal action in the economic area. However, the evolution of public policy and constitutional interpretation over time has drastically altered this concept. The BBA, with its focus on fiscal responsibility, does not address the restoration of these enumerated powers.
The BBA's supermajority voting requirements have been a point of contention. While some argue that these requirements restore necessary structural constraints on Congress, others believe they would increase the power of individual holdouts, leading to increased spending and deficits. The BBA's requirement for a balanced budget every year, regardless of the economic climate, could also have adverse economic effects, potentially tipping weak economies into recession and causing significant job losses.
Furthermore, the BBA's restrictions on borrowing and debt limit increases could hinder the federal government's ability to invest in infrastructure and other initiatives to boost future economic growth. This contrasts with the concept of enumerated powers, which allows for flexibility and adaptation to the country's needs.
In conclusion, while the Compact for America's Balanced Budget Amendment addresses fiscal responsibility, it does not restore the concept of enumerated powers in the Constitution. The BBA's focus on strict budgetary constraints and supermajority voting requirements could have unintended economic consequences and fails to address the broader issue of restoring the limited role of government as envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.
Understanding the Executive Branch: Its Core Function and Purpose
You may want to see also
The Compact for America's budget-balancing scheme could allow Congress to spend on unconstitutional projects
The Compact for America (CFA) is a plan that would increase spending and grant the president new powers. The CFA's constitutional convention, scheduled for July 4, 2013, has been criticized for posing an unacceptably high risk of damaging the Constitution. The CFA's balanced budget amendment (BBA) proposal would allow Congress to spend money on anything, regardless of its unconstitutionality, as long as the spending limit mentioned in Section 2 of the BBA is not exceeded. This means that the CFA's BBA does little to address Congress's unconstitutional spending habits.
The CFA's budget-balancing scheme could allow Congress to continue funding projects and programs that are not authorized by the Constitution. For example, Section 3 of the CFA's BBA explicitly authorizes an increase in the federal debt limit to 105% of the actual debt level on the effective date of this amendment. This indicates a potential deviation from the goal of a balanced budget.
The CFA's BBA also includes provisions that grant the president new powers over the budget-making process, which are not mentioned in the Constitution. For instance, the CFA's proposal states that if the debt exceeds 98% of the debt limit, the president must enforce the limit by designating specific expenditures for impoundment. If the president fails to do so, they can be impeached. This grants the president significant authority over the budget, which is not in line with the Constitution.
The CFA's proposal for a constitutional convention and a BBA has faced resistance due to concerns about its potential impact on the Constitution. Critics argue that the CFA's BBA does not restore the concept of enumerated powers and instead allows Congress to continue spending on unconstitutional projects. The proposal's potential to enable unconstitutional spending and grant new powers to the president has raised alarms among those who stand for upholding the Constitution.
In conclusion, the Compact for America's budget-balancing scheme, through its BBA, could allow Congress to spend on projects that are not authorized by the Constitution. The CFA's proposal has been criticized for posing a threat to the Constitution by potentially enabling unconstitutional spending and expanding the president's powers. The resistance to the CFA's initiative highlights the importance of safeguarding the Constitution and addressing any potential risks that proposals like the CFA may pose to the foundational principles of the nation.
George Washington's Influence on the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Compact for America's constitutional convention could have potentially Constitution-threatening side effects
The Compact for America (CFA) initiative proposes a constitutional convention to amend the US Constitution to include a balanced budget amendment (BBA). This amendment would require the federal government to have a balanced budget every year, which could result in massive budget cuts. While the CFA claims that this amendment is necessary to control spending and reduce the tax burden, there are concerns that it could have potentially threatening side effects on the Constitution.
Firstly, the CFA's BBA does not restore the concept of enumerated powers. Under the current system, Congress can only spend money in areas specifically permitted by the Constitution in Article I. However, the CFA's BBA would allow Congress to spend money on anything, regardless of its constitutionality, as long as it does not exceed the spending limits set in Section 2 of the BBA. This means that Congress could continue to spend on unconstitutional projects and programs. In fact, Section 3 of the CFA's BBA even authorizes an increase in the federal debt limit, potentially leading to even more unconstitutional spending.
Secondly, the constitutional convention itself poses a risk of damage to the Constitution. Such a convention, bringing together delegates from all 50 states, could result in proposals that go beyond the intended purpose of adding a BBA. With such a large and diverse group of participants, there is a high risk of unintended consequences and potential abuses of the Article V constitutional amendment process.
Additionally, the CFA's BBA could have negative economic impacts. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, requiring a balanced budget every year could tip weak economies into recession, making recessions longer and deeper, and resulting in significant job losses. This could have far-reaching consequences for the country's economic stability and the well-being of its citizens.
Overall, while the CFA initiative may have been well-intentioned, its proposed constitutional convention and BBA could potentially threaten the integrity and stability of the US Constitution and the nation as a whole. It is important to thoroughly consider and address these concerns before proceeding with any amendments to the Constitution.
Constitutional Similarities Between the US and the UK
You may want to see also
The Compact for America's constitutional amendment could cause economic damage and job losses
The Compact for America (CFA) is an initiative that proposes a constitutional convention to introduce a balanced budget amendment (BBA) to the US Constitution. The goal is to force the federal government to have a balanced budget every year. However, critics argue that this amendment could cause significant economic damage and job losses.
The CFA's BBA does not restore the concept of enumerated powers, as it allows Congress to spend money on anything as long as it does not exceed the limits set in Section 2. This means that Congress could continue spending on unconstitutional projects and programs. Additionally, Section 3 of the CFA's BBA authorizes an increase in the federal debt limit, which could further impact the economy.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities warns that requiring a balanced budget every year could have severe economic consequences. It could push weak economies into recession and make recessions longer and deeper, resulting in substantial job losses. The proposed amendment does not account for economic fluctuations and could hinder the government's ability to respond to economic crises.
Furthermore, the constitutional convention itself poses risks. As recognized by the Goldwater Institute, one of the organizations behind the CFA, "abuses of the Article V constitutional amendment process are possible." The convention could potentially lead to unintended consequences and side effects that threaten the Constitution.
While the CFA lists existing interstate compacts as evidence of the effectiveness of such agreements, the proposed BBA differs significantly. The BBA would directly impact the Constitution, potentially disrupting the checks and balances and separation of powers that are integral to the US political system.
Green Card Holders: What Constitutional Rights Apply?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Compact for America (CFA) initiative is a proposal for states to adopt a balanced budget amendment to the US Constitution.
The CFA's proposal would allow Congress to spend money on anything, regardless of its constitutionality, as long as it does not exceed the limits set in Section 2 of their BBA.
The CFA's proposal does not restore the concept of enumerated powers, allowing Congress to continue spending on projects and programs not authorized by the Constitution.
The Goldwater Institute, one of the organizations behind the CFA, has recognized the potential for "abuses of the Article V constitutional amendment process". Despite this, the CFA has continued to pursue its initiative.
The CFA has set a "do or die" date of April 12, 2021, for the proposal of the balanced budget amendment, which has already been joined by several states.
