By: Mary Mostert, Analyst, Banner of Liberty (www.bannerofliberty.com)
March 14, 2001
U.S. Senators Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) have introduced a resolution to tie the phase in of the Bush tax cuts to a "trigger" in the tax package. The "trigger" is supposed to tie decisions on the use of the surplus - both tax cuts and spending - "to success in meeting debt reduction goals."
That seemed vaguely familiar to me but I couldn't quite place it until I heard Mike Reagan mention the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings "Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act." That bill, Mike's father, President Ronald Reagan said, was designed to "impose the discipline we now lack by locking us into a spending reduction plan. It will establish a maximum allowable deficit ceiling beginning with our current 1986 deficit of $180 billion, and then it will reduce that deficit in equal steps to a balanced budget in calendar year 1990. One of the reasons I like this Gramm-Rudman bill is because it attacks budget deficits the right way, not by raising taxes, but by restraining spending. I want it clearly understood that while spending discipline must and will be enforced, we will honor our commitments on Social Security. We will maintain a strong defense, and I expect the Congress to live up to its previous commitments on defense."
When President Reagan said that, the deficit for the year 1985 was $221 billion. The legislation, passed by a Democrat Congress, was written to prevent any budget with a deficit "greater than the maximum allowable as set by law." Reagan said at the time that "According to the law neither House may consider any budget that violates these ceilings. Speaking for myself, I would like to make an additional request--that Congress work with me to put in place a balanced budget constitutional amendment to begin taking effect in 1991. It will make permanent our plan to have no deficits at the Federal level."
And Ronald Reagan kept that promise, but the Democrats in control of Congress didn't keep their promise which was why we had the "Reagan deficits" the Democrats are now talking about. The Gramm-Rudman bill to automatically "sequester" spending was challenged in the courts. The Supreme Court decision in Bowsher v. Synar, 478 U.S. 714 (1986) (USSC+) stated:
"The powers vested in the Comptroller General under § 251 violate the Constitution's command that Congress play no direct role in the execution of the laws.(a) Under the constitutional principle of separation of powers, Congress cannot reserve for itself the power of removal of an officer charged with the execution of the laws except by impeachment. To permit the execution of the laws to be vested in an officer answerable only to Congress would, in practical terms, reserve in Congress control of the execution of the laws. The structure of the Constitution does not permit Congress to execute the laws; it follows that Congress cannot grant to an officer under its control what it does not possess.
In other words, the Congress had given power to the Comptroller General, in an effort to evade their own responsibilities in passing a budget that spent more money than the Federal Treasury had, that the Congress did not possess itself. The sequestering didn't work and the Congress did nothing to hold back the spending.
Olympia Snow's "trigger" bill would also be an "automatic" mechanism, whereby Congress would evade its responsibilities, as they did in the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill. The bill states:
(1) with respect to any long-term, Federal surplus-reducing actions adopted by the 107th Congress pursuant to the Congressional Budget Office's projected surpluses, such actions shall include a legislative `trigger' or `safety' mechanism that links the phase-in of such actions to actual budgetary outcomes over the next 10 fiscal years;
(2) this legislative `trigger' or `safety' mechanism shall outline specific legislative or automatic action that shall be taken should specified levels of Federal debt reduction or on-budget surpluses not be realized, in order to maintain fiscal discipline and continue the reduction of our national debt;
(3) the legislative `trigger' or `safety' mechanism shall be applied prospectively and not repeal or cancel any previously implemented portion of a surplus-reducing action;
(4) enactment of a legislative `trigger' or `safety' mechanism shall not prevent Congress from passing other legislation affecting the level of Federal revenues or spending should future economic performance dictate such action; and
(5) this legislative `trigger' or `safety' mechanism will ensure fiscal discipline because it restrains both Government spending and tax cuts, by requiring that the budget is balanced and that specified debt reduction targets are met.
Sen. Snowe's "automatic" trigger is so "automatic" that the bill does not tell us exactly who is going to "automatically" alter the budget and appropriations bills to effect a reduction or increase in the taxes or spending of congress.
It's close to St. Patrick's day. Perhaps the senators who are sponsoring this bill, Senators Snow, Bayh, Chafee, Landrieu, Collins, Feinstein, Jeffords, Torricelli, Specter, Carper and Stabenow, think it won't be unconstitutional if the automatic trigger is controlled by a leprechaun, thereby again enabling them to blame the president it if doesn't go well, but take the credit if it does go well.
To comment: mmostert@bannerofliberty.com
To Subscribe to the Reagan Monitor, the newsletter that gives you news FACTS you can USE to make your life, and the world, better go to:
Start Your Subscription
