By The Right Scoop


Earlier today Obama threatened he would veto the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill if it reaches his desk. Levin says the only problem with this is that, while he can veto the Cut and Cap part, if the Balanced Budget Amendment passes both the House and the Senate it goes to the states, not Obama. He’s got nothing to do with it.

One would expect a brilliant, ivy league Constitutional Law Professor to know these things:

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • Anonymous

    I think Obama said “if it reaches his desk” because the Senate may not pass it. Yet, in that case its not called a veto its called just not signing the amendment, but Obama likes to use big scary words he doesn’t understand.

    • Anonymous

      Read the Constitution a President is NOT INVOLVED WITH CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS !!!!!! two thirds of both houses of Congress must pass and send to the States for ratification, the people vote to ratify 38 States must vote to adopt it. Or the legislatures of 38 States can submit a petition for amendment to Congress, with 38 in support it goes back to all States to be voted on by the people.

      • Anonymous

        Now thats a face palm.

        Dope! *as i face palm*

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7X6YY64QUYR3HKJBZYGONZWY4M nesta

        That might be applicable if the legislation in question was an amendment to the Constitution. It isn’t. It is a proposed amendment to the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

        • Anonymous

          I’m not aware of that and haven’t heard that connection made by anyone else either on a blog or a newsprogram/paper.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7X6YY64QUYR3HKJBZYGONZWY4M nesta

            I didn’t draw the connection from another’s analysis of the bill. I read the bill. The only amendment proposed in the bill is to the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and restricts Congress from passing any budget that requires expenditures in excess of expected revenues. There is no Constitutional amendment proposed in HR 2560.

            • Anonymous

              Good digging on your part do you have a link?

              • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7X6YY64QUYR3HKJBZYGONZWY4M nesta

                http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-2560

                The bill doesn’t contain a Constitutional amendment, however it does refer to one. The balance aspect of the bill requires that a separate piece of legislation, which does consist of a Constitutional amendment, be submitted to the states. However, the kicker here, the part that Mr. Levin fails so sadly to understand, is that this requirement is not the Constitutional amendment. It is simply a bill requiring that a Constitutional amendment be presented to the states. As a bill, it can be vetoed by the President. Basically the authors of HR 2560 are attempting an end run around the constitutional process. Instead of simply putting the amendment up for a vote in the House and Senate, garnering the necessary votes, and then sending it to the states for ratification, they are requiring the amendment to be presented to the states as a part of the cost of raising the debt limit. That, in itself, does not follow the spirit of the Constitution.

                • Anonymous

                  Thanks alot you are one smart cookie. I appreciate the explination and link greatly.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7X6YY64QUYR3HKJBZYGONZWY4M nesta

                  You’re very welcome.

        • UF Gator

          Thank you Mark for bringing it to the fore and also btw thanks “nesta” — we now all know we have something for which to hope it changes: that is, a proposed amendment to the U. S. Constitution … to lock-in the requirement for a POTUS to plan ahead using the age-old budget architecture… Mark you are GREAT at bringing the best and the worst out so that it can be examined. A true scholar and American you are!!!!!!!

      • http://www.facebook.com/spiderpaz Dominic Paz

        2/3 of both houses can’t agree on what time to grab lunch, let alone something this major. This amendment has zero chance.

        • Anonymous

          That’s why there are two routes to get this done. The States can send it up or the Congress can send it down. So as I said if 38 Govenors get their State legislature to agree to the same language we have a balanced budget amendment. Of course that’s not gonna happen so I’m afraid America is going to spend itself out of exsistence, being that I’m close to 60 hopefully I’ll be dead and won’t have to see it.

          • Anonymous

            I wish my public school had a better civics class :(

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_53YAPDXSTIGEDINDXF46CAB7ZY voted against carter

              DEEP nose pick.

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_53YAPDXSTIGEDINDXF46CAB7ZY voted against carter

              DEEP nose pick.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christopher-Smith/662267592 Christopher Smith

        Obama didn’t say he would veto the amendment. He said he would veto the ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance Act HR 2560 (new window)

        The bill is not an amendment. It does not contain the text of ANY balanced budget amendment. It states that the debt limit will be raised when a separate amendment passes both houses and is passed to the states. Thus, he CAN veto this bill which ties raising the debt limit to the passage of said amendment…

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_53YAPDXSTIGEDINDXF46CAB7ZY voted against carter

      nose pick.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_53YAPDXSTIGEDINDXF46CAB7ZY voted against carter

      nose pick.

  • http://twitter.com/vettegal14 Robin Carmack

    I simply find it more amazing every day that 54 million people voted for the biggest fraud this country has ever seen. How can people be so naive? Wow

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000152902441 Jeremy Volkens

      The fault lies primarily with our propagandist news media. With all of the things wrong with our republic, if the media wasn’t so in the tank for one political party, in particular this Emper… oops I mean President, many of our problems wouldn’t even exist. Common sense and logic will win the debate almost every time IF it is given a voice.

      • Richard Wohltmann

        Now the WH officially has a ministry of propaganda. The media elite are tripping over themselves to get BO’s message out. And all the useful idiots suck it up without a thought. I think the lefties are so confused and weak that they NEED the government to control them and tell them what to do.

    • Anonymous

      Sorry , it was 64 million useful IDIOTS who voted for your CHAIRMAN OBAMA !

      • Anonymous

        Don’t you mean Maobama?

        • http://www.miketheinfidel.com/ MikeTheInfidel

          Do you honestly think that was clever?

        • Anonymous

          Yes , rick0857 , how dumb of me I should have written DEAR LEADER CHAIRMAN Maobama of his United Socialist States of America !

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y7VE427RCSFOUUEOTBBMGZX26E janna131

        Exactly. I still havnt figured that out. Why he fooled so many people !!!!

        • Anonymous

          janna131 , the 64 million DRONES taught by the Education DRONES of your NEA

          I stand with ISRAEL 08/24/11 . (period)

    • Anonymous

      Unfortunately I think that since the elections of 2000 there has been a wide swath of people who wanted to retaliate against “the evil Bush/Cheney Regime”. They gave vent to their case of Bush Derangement Syndrome by voting for someone who seemed to be the polar opposite. It didn’t occur to them what Obama really was. He “wasn’t” Bush or a Republican. That’s all that mattered to them. Now the whole country has to pay for their tantrum.

      • http://twitter.com/vettegal14 Robin Carmack

        Agree totally. The thing for me is, he is EXACTLY what he campaigned to be. His entire redistribution of wealth socialist crap threw up red flags everywhere. I never saw him as anything but a fraud because he is so contradictory. The question now is, will the lesson be learned? Will people pay more attention to a candidate’s background, etc? One can only hope

      • Anonymous

        You also have to factor in the reality that Bush also alienated an huge chunck of the true conservative base by greatly expanding the size of government, bloating our regulations, disregarding the Constitution, cranking up unprecedented spending/debt/deficits, failed to veto McCain-Fiengold, establishing the Medicare Prescription program while failing to privatize social security, and then pissed away nearly a trillion on TARP with the Bernack.

        Then in a stroke of sheer brilliance the Elephants nominated the RINO “reach across the aisle and get screwed” Maverick McCain.

      • Anonymous

        That makes more sense than just about any arguement I’ve heard in the last two and a half years. Good heads up !!!

  • http://poorrichardsnews.com Poor Richard

    The Cut, Cap, and Balance bill is not the amendment itself. The bill merely ties the debt ceiling to the passage of a balanced budget amendment. CCB has already been introduced to both the House and Senate. The vote in the House on the actual amendment been postponed by Eric Cantor until next week: http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/7774637970/balanced-budget-amendment-vote-postponed-in-house-until

  • Anonymous

    “THANK GOD FOR THE GREAT ONE !”

    • Anonymous

      He is incredible.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t have the time to read the bill. But I’m just wondering why they have to make a “bill” out of it. Congress can pass any Spending Resolution it wants, and the President has nothing to do with those. I realize they are trying like hell to find a few honorable Dems who love this country to put an end to the spending madness. I do understand the pressure these guys operate under.

    Why can’t they do all this gamesmanship, totally within the scope of Congress’ actual, Constitutionally-mandated powers? Why even involve President “Walks Out When The Going Gets Tough” at all?

    • Anonymous

      Yeah but he still has to sign them. The founders never dreamed that this Republic would become a hotbed of vipers, they naturally assumed and rightly so I think that people elected to office would be Men of Honor. Of course they also assumed and warned us that in order to maintain these principles set forth in those documents would require a well educated public instructed in the workings of their government. If any of you have kids find out if they have a civics class in their school system. I’m willing to bet they don’t. I know I had to pass both civics and U.S. History to graduate high school.

    • Anonymous

      Yeah but he still has to sign them. The founders never dreamed that this Republic would become a hotbed of vipers, they naturally assumed and rightly so I think that people elected to office would be Men of Honor. Of course they also assumed and warned us that in order to maintain these principles set forth in those documents would require a well educated public instructed in the workings of their government. If any of you have kids find out if they have a civics class in their school system. I’m willing to bet they don’t. I know I had to pass both civics and U.S. History to graduate high school.

      • Anonymous

        That’s why I wonder about this whole game. He doesn’t *get* to sign budget resolutions. That’s totally a power reserved to congress. It can’t even be filibustered in the Senate.

        The reason people call these thing’s “the President’s budget” is because it’s a requirement of the Budget And Accounting Act of 1921 that the President submit an annual budget. Congress responds with a “resolution” which directs the disbursement of funds. A budget resolution, strictly speaking, isn’t “law.” It’s an exercise of Constitutional authority. (It’s not a “bill” that can be “signed” into law by the President.)

        That level of detail is usually left out of normal history and civics, though. I had to look it all up a few years ago, when I realized I didn’t know what the hell I was talking about.

      • Anonymous

        They have Social Studies which hardly teaches anything of importance. It’s filled with politically correct dogma and everything is about diversity. The worst textbook I saw was my son’s 5th Grade Social Studies which started out with a photo of slaves rowing a slave ship, then went to Navajo blankets and jars, then Sufferagettes followed by a photo of Rosa Parks, then 60 pages about Islam, 1 page for Hinduism, 1/2 page for Christianity and same for Judaism. It was a nightmare. Luckily the teacher didn’t use the book because she agreed with my assessment. They are required to pass US History in High School but I’m not sure how many actually pay attention.

        • Anonymous

          I know and It’s a shame. When I was in elementary school 1-6 grades I was learning about Geo. Washington, Adams, Jefferson. The Revolutionary War the War of 1812. The Civil War. The Declaration, The Constitution, all complete with school films and so forth. It was great and kept my attention. Either it was a good teacher or material or both, my guess both. Of course local and State education boards established the criteria. So I guess I’m giving my age away here. We need to eliminate the Dept of Ed. and get this back to the States.

      • KenInMontana

        I would remind you of a quote attributed to one Benjamin Franklin, when asked what kind of government they had given to the people, to which he is said to have replied, “A republic,if you can keep it“. I don’t believe the founders were under any illusions about the nature of man and the effects of power on that nature.

        • Anonymous

          Good Point, but that is just purported to have happened, it’s not written anywhere.

          • KenInMontana

            Which would be why I said “attributed to”, however by their own writings the founders clearly understood the effects of power on men and the fallibility of man.

            • Anonymous

              I just started reading Washington from Library of America, from the revolution through the war so on. I plan to buy the rest of the Founders in the series too. I think it will help foster insight and better understanding of these men. But then I’ve always had a voracious appitite for American History. you can check out some of their titles at http://www.loa.org

      • KenInMontana

        I would remind you of a quote attributed to one Benjamin Franklin, when asked what kind of government they had given to the people, to which he is said to have replied, “A republic,if you can keep it“. I don’t believe the founders were under any illusions about the nature of man and the effects of power on that nature.

  • http://www.theancient.us The Ancient

    See that is where he is Wrong, Nothing can happen with out the Permission of Emperor Obama

  • http://www.theancient.us The Ancient

    See that is where he is Wrong, Nothing can happen with out the Permission of Emperor Obama

  • http://www.facebook.com/Patriot.Num1 Tom Beebe

    Obama

  • http://www.facebook.com/Patriot.Num1 Tom Beebe

    Obama

  • Anonymous

    It’s gaffes like this that matter, as opposed to where John Wayne was born.

    • http://twitter.com/gingerjet tim

      Accept its not a gaffe. The bill itself is not the proposed amendment. So its really Levin who is lying here.

      • Anonymous

        Exactly. Another gaffe by another right-winger.

      • Anonymous

        Sorry Tim, it took me a while understand your comment. I think you meant to write “except” instead of “accept.”

        Re-listen to the clip. Mark Levin was not referring to the “Cap, Cut & Balance” bill, but rather the balanced budget amendment itself. If President Obama thinks he can veto an amendment, then he is sadly mistaken; read Article V of our constitution.

        I certainly hope that this was a gaffe, not an indication of our president’s intelligence.

  • http://www.kennethballard.com Kenneth

    Personally I’d like to see them actually attempt to propose the amendment to the States. I don’t think that’s going to happen, as that requires 2/3rds of both chambers. Good luck on that.

    • stodghie

      kenneth you just might be surprised.

    • Anonymous

      That is the likely reality Kenneth and then the states need to ratify.

      Anyway does anyone trust the cesspool we call Congress enough to let hem crack open the Constitution of the United States of America?

      The damn amendment will probably be 2000 pages long and we’d have Boehner running around in high heels and lipstick screaming “We have to pass the amendment so we can find out what’s in it!”

    • Anonymous

      That is the likely reality Kenneth and then the states need to ratify.

      Anyway does anyone trust the cesspool we call Congress enough to let hem crack open the Constitution of the United States of America?

      The damn amendment will probably be 2000 pages long and we’d have Boehner running around in high heels and lipstick screaming “We have to pass the amendment so we can find out what’s in it!”

      • KenInMontana

        There is another option, it is known as a “convention to amend the Constitution” and it completely circumvents the Federal government, it is mentioned in the Constitution and it is called by the people of the several states. In such a convention the amendment proceeds from the convention directly to the states and if approved by two thirds of the states it becomes law as an amendment to the Constitution.

        • Kenneth Fannon

          The two-thirds part is only to propose the amendment. Two-thirds of the States’ legislatures need to pass a resolution calling for an amendment to the Constitution. It doesn’t necessarily circumvent the Congress; it merely states that the States called forth for the amendment (and thus prevents Congress from voting it down). Now Congress at that time would be REQUIRED to put forth an amendment to the States. It still requires three-fourths (currently 38) of the States ratifying the amendment for it to become a part of the Constitution.

          • KenInMontana

            Yes you are correct it’s 3/4’s to ratify, but it does “bypass” the need to fight it through Congress as they have no choice but to pass it on to the States for ratification. The 2/3’s is required to move it from the convention and on to the ratification process.

          • KenInMontana

            Yes you are correct it’s 3/4’s to ratify, but it does “bypass” the need to fight it through Congress as they have no choice but to pass it on to the States for ratification. The 2/3’s is required to move it from the convention and on to the ratification process.

  • Anonymous

    This is why we listen to Mark Levin, now let’s see as Mark would say…..will the back benchers pick up on these facts and report it on Tuesday…hummmm

  • Augustus

    After realizing his mistake, Obama threatened instead to stomp his feet and yell really loud if the amendment passes both the House and Senate.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DJXU6TXELTJL7VXNDSSC7VA7ME * *
  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UP3IAYHQSHXQWIMXB4FADRPVIU Bryan

    Sorry Levin, Obama didn’t say he would veto the amendment. He said he would veto the ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance Act HR 2560 (new window)

    The bill is not an amendment. It does not contain the text of ANY balanced budget amendment. It states that the debt limit will be raised when a separate amendment passes both houses and is passed to the states. Thus, he CAN veto this bill which ties raising the debt limit to the passage of said amendment…

    • TimSPC

      Hey, stop making sense.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RZIN62BSE7BYAYV3ZISSLYSIII Zombie Reagan

      WAT?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RZIN62BSE7BYAYV3ZISSLYSIII Zombie Reagan

      WAT?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7TDQPROUQHNUVFWCZCCSF3GSY BenD

    Someone smarter than me pointed this out…
    Sorry Levin, Obama didn’t say he would veto the amendment. He said he would veto the ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance Act HR 2560 (new window)

    The bill is not an amendment. It does not contain the text of ANY balanced budget amendment. It states that the debt limit will be raised when a separate amendment passes both houses and is passed to the states. Thus, he CAN veto this bill which ties raising the debt limit to the passage of said amendment.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7TDQPROUQHNUVFWCZCCSF3GSY BenD

    Someone smarter than me pointed this out…
    Sorry Levin, Obama didn’t say he would veto the amendment. He said he would veto the ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance Act HR 2560 (new window)

    The bill is not an amendment. It does not contain the text of ANY balanced budget amendment. It states that the debt limit will be raised when a separate amendment passes both houses and is passed to the states. Thus, he CAN veto this bill which ties raising the debt limit to the passage of said amendment.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R7TDQPROUQHNUVFWCZCCSF3GSY BenD

    I think Obama can veto the current bill, the amendment has not yet been proposed. So either someone misunderstood Levin’s statement, or Levin misspoke (please tell me he’s not going crazy too!)

  • Anonymous

    this is so much fun! love mark! thank you for educating us. i love it.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OKZ6AMQ3EZN6MK7BXIJCNBD344 Darren

      Except that he’s wrong.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OKZ6AMQ3EZN6MK7BXIJCNBD344 Darren

      Except that he’s wrong.

  • Anonymous

    this is so much fun! love mark! thank you for educating us. i love it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RZIN62BSE7BYAYV3ZISSLYSIII Zombie Reagan

    “Cut, Cap, and Balance bill” Not a Constitutional Amendment but just a bill. Talk about the wrong scoop.

    • KenInMontana

      The only thing wrong is that you didn’t actually comprehend when you read what Scoop wrote.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_53YAPDXSTIGEDINDXF46CAB7ZY voted against carter

      OH look!! a NEWly created MINISTRY OF TRUTH OBAMA TROLL!!!

      15 post’s total. WOW!! LOL!! AND original material too!! (sarc.)

      Hey zr,.. say hi to Jesse Lee and Dan Pfeiffer for me!!!

      ok. taged this one. Don’t need to tag it again.”-)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7X6YY64QUYR3HKJBZYGONZWY4M nesta

    No, Mr. Levin, you are the one who fails to understand the legislative process. This legislation is not an amendment to the Constitution. It is an amendment to the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. As such it is still legislation that will need to be signed or vetoed by the President.

  • http://www.facebook.com/babyfacebjj Philip Hoskins

    He never said he would veto the amendment. He said he would veto the bill titled
    “Cut, Cap, and Balance Act HR 2560″. This bill has language in it that requires the passage of a balanced budget amendment proposal before the debt ceiling can be raised. The bill itself is not an amendment proposal.

    He can absolutely veto that bill.

  • Anonymous

    Call me the Amendment is passed and added to the Constitution. Then I will listen.

    No way in hell will ANY politician cut off the free money train.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OKZ6AMQ3EZN6MK7BXIJCNBD344 Darren

    Mark Levin is absolutely wrong. Not that it’s the first time.

  • Ken Brill

    OMG, get a freaking hobby, its all part of a catchy bumper sticker slogan not an actual bill, if it would pass the amendment wouldnt be part of what comes to his desk but it would sound really stupid if he said “I will veto the parts of Cut,Cap and Balance that, you know the cut and cap parts”

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_S2FKTF3MVLASN3KN6R6ZSMIXUM Christian

    Mark Levin is f#@k-tard and so are all the people who agree with him. Why don’t you all go live in Iraq and Afghanistan where you don’t mind all your hard earned tax dollars being spent (and misplaced to the tune of 9 billion), f#@king Arab loving traitors!

  • http://www.Xenu.net simkatu

    Who cares? Nobody with even half a brain wants a balanced budget amendment. It will never pass the senate and if it did it wouldn’t pass 38 states. Our founders intended for our government to be able to borrow money when it was necessary. Tearing up all your credit cards and reducing the amount you can borrow to zero is a fiscally irresponsible action.

  • http://www.Xenu.net simkatu

    Obama can veto the HR Bill 2560 called “Cut, Cap, and Balance Act”. This article’s author is an idiot for suggesting that he cannot.

    The Balanced Budget Amendment is something else entirely and it has no chance of passing the Senate, nor would it have any chance of making it through the states.

  • Anonymous

    Obama is a LIAR, and has never spoken the truth to the masses! Shameful, scaring senior’s about thier ss checks. Sicko!

  • Anonymous

    Obama is a LIAR, and has never spoken the truth to the masses! Shameful, scaring senior’s about thier ss checks. Sicko!

  • UF Gator

    Thank you Mark for bringing it to the fore and also btw thanks “nesta” — we now all know we have something for which to hope it changes: that is, a proposed amendment to the U. S. Constitution … to lock-in the requirement for a POTUS to plan ahead using the age-old budget architecture… Mark you are GREAT at bringing the best and the worst out so that it can be examined. A true scholar and American you are!!!!!!!

  • UF Gator

    Thank you Mark for bringing it to the fore and also btw thanks “nesta” — we now all know we have something for which to hope it changes: that is, a proposed amendment to the U. S. Constitution … to lock-in the requirement for a POTUS to plan ahead using the age-old budget architecture… Mark you are GREAT at bringing the best and the worst out so that it can be examined. A true scholar and American you are!!!!!!!

  • UF Gator

    Thank you Mark for bringing it to the fore and also btw thanks “nesta” — we now all know we have something for which to hope it changes: that is, a proposed amendment to the U. S. Constitution … to lock-in the requirement for a POTUS to plan ahead using the age-old budget architecture… Mark you are GREAT at bringing the best and the worst out so that it can be examined. A true scholar and American you are!!!!!!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fred-Herndon/100000695261229 Fred Herndon

    Where are the brilliant, ivy league Constitutional Law Professors that know Obama is illegal, a criminal, has violated the Constitution many times, has commited both Perjury and Fraud, and should be removed right now from office?

    I just discounted IVY LEAGUE Education Establishments in Law to sub standard rating.

  • Josie

    So how / what can we do to make this go through the Senate. It seems that the few gains we get always get blocked at the Senate level. Calls, emails don’t seem to have any affect on at least half of them. They have a plan to steal this country from us and they are not going to stop. Is this where we go to DC and demand they follow the peoples will?

  • Josie

    So how / what can we do to make this go through the Senate. It seems that the few gains we get always get blocked at the Senate level. Calls, emails don’t seem to have any affect on at least half of them. They have a plan to steal this country from us and they are not going to stop. Is this where we go to DC and demand they follow the peoples will?

  • Anonymous

    They used the name Cut Tax and Balance then put a bill with that name to a vote and it did not address the pledge. Read the story.

    http://visiontoamerica.org/2518/bachmann-and-paul-vote-no-on-cut-cap-and-balance/

  • bestmoneyspent

    They used the name Cut Tax and Balance then put a bill with that name to a vote and it did not address the pledge. Read the story

    http://visiontoamerica.org/2518/bachmann-and-paul-vote-no-on-cut-cap-and-balance/

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NPQQJ4XAHBER4YMN3GMQY44P7U USAPatriot

    The House would have been smarter to vote on the balanced budget amendment proposal as a separate issue. The present legislation as it is will be defeated in the Senate, which would include the amendment proposal. Mr. Levin is absolutely correct though. The American people should DEMAND from their state legislatures to call for a Constitutional convention to enact the balanced budget amendment. Obama cannot stop that should a convention be called. One other thing. A balanced budget amendment MUST NOT preclude Congress from appropriating money for contingencies such as natural disaster, economic instability, or most importantly, issues that threaten our national security.

  • hsist

    He can veto the bill that calls for the amendment, which is this cut, cap, thing. The actual amendment would be done by resolution which doesn’t need presidential approval.

    BUT HE CAN VETO THIS LAW SINCE THE LAW ISN’T THE AMENDMENT, OR THE RESOLUTION WHICH IS PART OF THE AMENDMENT PROCESS.

    But hey, reading comprehension doesn’t seem to be a strong suit with the GOP

  • Anonymous

    HELLO,
    Bring it on “O-DUMMY”. BRING IT ON!!!!

  • millerrg

    The problem with the statement that, “… the only problem with this is that, while he can veto the Cut and Cap part, if the Balanced Budget Amendment passes both the House and the Senate it goes to the states, not Obama. He’s got nothing to do with it.” is that the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill does not contain an actual proposed constitutional amendment, and it didn’t pass the House of Representatives by the required 2/3 majority that would be required for a constitutional amendment even if it had contained such an amendment. This suggests that such an amendment might well not pass the House by the required 2/3 majority, and there is no apparent reason to believe even the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill will pass in the Senate, or that a Balanced Budget Amendment would pass in the Senate by the required 2/3 majority.

    Some times one must look at the political realities.

  • http://twitter.com/valuemetrics Stanley Platt

    How can a “Budget Amendment” become law if there is “No Budget”, only a “Continuing Resolution”?

  • http://twitter.com/valuemetrics Stanley Platt

    How can a “Budget Amendment” become law if there is “No Budget”, only a “Continuing Resolution”?