Sen. Orrin Hatch sponsors balanced-budget amendment for 17th time

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.

  • facts_r_stubborn Kaysville, UT
    Jan. 28, 2011 12:35 p.m.

    Will all the anti-incumbent posters please at least read the headline before posting: "Sen. Orrin Hatch sponsors balanced-budget amendment for 17th time" In other words, he has been fighting through out his career for a balanced budget. For all you ardent supporters of Senator Lee, he is an incumbent now, where is the balanced budget?

    As for the supposed votes for unbalanced budgets, we will see if Senator Lee votes against every single budget once it is hammered out. After the battle at some point a budget needs to be passed and the work of the people moved forward. You do what you can. But I will give Senator Lee another month or two to balance the budget.

    Get the picture? Words are cheap. Getting tough things done in Washington when you are only one of one hundred senators in half of the legislative branch of a tri-branch government is a tall order, not to mention fighting a huge bureaucracy with almost unstoppable momentum and tens of millions of entitlement recipients who represent a powerful voting block.

    Ok, I'll give Senator Lee a whole year to solve this problem. Good luck with that one!

  • E. Hindman Ogden, UT
    Jan. 27, 2011 2:31 p.m.

    Balanced budget and flag burning - Hatch's proposed legislation are the Susan Lucci of Congress.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 27, 2011 7:59 a.m.

    I'll never believe Hatch on this one. He has proposed a lot of spending on programs over the years as well as support for budgets with huge deficits. It is easy to preach balanced budgets, but when he has been in charge, he never followed through. This is a game.

  • Independent Henderson, NV
    Jan. 26, 2011 12:44 p.m.

    "I'd like to propose that conservatives stop saying they support balanced budgets until they show the math on how they would balance said budget."

    Fair enough, but I think liberals should stop saying they support more spending until they show the math on how they would pay for it.

    Let both side show us the math, and then we can decide once and for all if we want higher taxes, less spending, or a combination of both, instead of always using the less taxes and more spending option. Right now the one option that shouldn't be an option is the only one that is ever used.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 26, 2011 8:22 a.m.

    'Pagan also ignores whitehouse projections that BO will increase gross federal debt more in 3 years than bush did in 8.' - lost in DC | 7:24 p.m. Jan. 25, 2011

    Ah, so we should be upset about what is PROJECTED to happen.

    Not what actually has.

    *'Bush Administration Adds $4 Trillion To National Debt' - Posted by Mark Knoller - CBSNews - 03/04/10

    'With no fanfare and little notice, the national debt has grown by more than $4 trillion during George W. Bush's presidency.'

    I'm not saying the debt won't go higher. But the comparison of 25% to previous presidents who added 300% to the debt makes this comparison moot.

    Every president since 1910 has added debt to the nation.

    Why the sudden outcry now?

    Because we can't 'afford it?'

    Then explain your compliance about debt the last 100 years.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 26, 2011 12:10 a.m.

    I'd like to propose that conservatives stop saying they support balanced budgets until they show the math on how they would balance said budget.

  • homers Provo, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 10:08 p.m.

    Sorry Ernest T. Bass - Clinton never proposed a balanced budget amendment. It was a GOP controlled Senate that came within one vote of passing a BBA in 1996. 66-34. It was introduced by the guy you say was opposed to it - Orrin Hatch. It wasn't even an election year for him DN subscriber. I don't think he believes he can pass it this Congress - I think he is setting the table for the next Congress when the GOP may have as many as 55 members and a bunch of Dems looking over their shoulder. The Dems have to defend 23 seats in 2012 and the GOP only 12 and in 2014 the Dems have to defend 20 seats and the GOP 13. By 2015 the place could have 60-40 GOP advantage and I think Hatch believes at that point he could get the BBA through. Setting the table and getting ready for the right opportunity.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 9:07 p.m.

    Why was Hatch opposed to a balance budget ammendment when Clinton suggested it?
    Hatch is the worst hypocrit in politics.

  • satch Highland, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 7:56 p.m.

    You've been in the senate HOW MANY years and this was never important until now? You're legacy is imbedded with the congress of the last 30 years.

    As someone who voted for you in the past- I think you and your colleagues failed me, my kids, and their kids. You thought of your own party and NOT of America.

    I hope to see new ideas and real leadership help America but it is going to take decades if at all.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 7:24 p.m.

    newslover - when? 1836?

    ST, don't be too hard on Pagan. Pagan doesn't understand that it gets harder to double the higher you get. Pagan also ignores whitehouse projections that BO will increase gross federal debt more in 3 years than bush did in 8. He came within the price of a Pelosi junket home of doing it in 2 years. Of course, with a repub congress, he might actually be held somewhat in check this year.

  • newslover Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 5:57 p.m.

    Old news... Dems already passed a balanced budget. What everyone want to know? Will Jon Huntsman run for Hatch's senate seat?

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 5:37 p.m.

    Hey, Orrin, you've been there for decades, voting for more and more spending, and increasing the debt limit every time.

    Now, you want an amendment that says we should not do all that.

    Why not just man up and stop the spending?

    Instead, you hide behind an amendment which may never pass, and has no enforcement teeth.

    Yup, typical politician, lots of talk but he won't actually make the tough choices.

    But, at least he is starting to talk like he is a conservative again--- must be an election year.

  • Independent Henderson, NV
    Jan. 25, 2011 4:02 p.m.

    "BBA provisions for any fiscal year when the U.S. is at war or engaged in significant military conflict."

    "Significant Military Conflict" is about as wide open and vague as "Necessary and Proper." It should be limited to when the U.S. is at war, officially declared by Congress pursuant to their Constitutional powers. The least we can do is require that military excursions with no clear purpose be fully funded under a balanced budget. Then we can force our government to actually have to chose between sending our troops abroad and other domestic needs. If we actually need to fight a war to defend our life, liberty, and property, by all means declare war and go over budget if needs be. But don't stand there and tell me we're going to spend money we don't have on public works projects for people who hate our guts, and half of that money will be lining the pockets of corrupt foreign politicians and our enemies anyway. Is it so much to ask that the money we waste in the middle east come under a balanced budget?

  • ST Layton, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 3:55 p.m.

    wow - pagan really has nothing else to do all day that to comment on practically every single story in the Desnews.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 3:46 p.m.

    Balaced budget?? HA!!! We will put men on Saturn before that ever happens with all the Reid/Pelosi types still left in congress.

  • Independent Henderson, NV
    Jan. 25, 2011 3:46 p.m.

    This is a great idea, but I would propose that exceptions to the balanced budget rule only be allowed when war is actually declared by Congress.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 25, 2011 3:26 p.m.

    'Attempting to curb a national deficit that has grown 25 percent in just the last two years, Sen. Orrin Hatch recently rolled out a constitutional balanced-budget amendment (BBA).' - Article

    Wow. That sounds 'really' bad.

    George W. Bush took our national debt from $5 trillion to $10 trillion, almost doubling it.

    Ronald Regan took the national debt from $1 trillion to $3 trillion. That's tripling it.

    That's a 200% and 300% addition to the national debt.

    I will admit, it is good that Hatch wants to curb the debt.

    He's been wildly 'successful' at that job for the last 35 years, since 1976.

    I was born in 1978.