A joint resolution proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
- Sponsor
- Sen. Husted, Jon [R-OH]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Nov 20, 2025
Bottom line
This joint resolution seeks to fundamentally alter federal fiscal policy by enshrining a balanced budget requirement into the U.S. Constitution, with significant implications for future government spending and taxation.
What it actually does
This joint resolution proposes a constitutional amendment that would require the federal government to balance its budget. It mandates that federal expenditures, excluding debt payments, must not exceed receipts, excluding borrowing, over a period that may extend beyond one year, with a 10-year implementation timeline. It also includes an emergency spending clause requiring a two-thirds vote in both chambers for exceptions.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that a balanced budget amendment is crucial for fiscal responsibility, curbing the national debt, and ensuring long-term economic stability. They contend it would force Congress to make difficult but necessary choices, preventing excessive spending and protecting future generations from unsustainable debt burdens.
Opponents contend
Opponents typically argue that a balanced budget amendment would severely restrict Congress's ability to respond to economic downturns, national emergencies, or unforeseen crises, potentially exacerbating recessions and hindering necessary investments. They also raise concerns about the practicalities of implementation and the potential for unintended consequences on social programs and infrastructure.
The bill text is extremely short and can be read quickly, but its implications are vast and require significant deliberation.
Article --, Section 1
Mandatory Budget Balance and Implementation Timeline
This section proposes that the federal government's spending must not exceed its income. It clarifies that this balance can be achieved over more than one year and excludes money used to pay off existing debt from the spending calculation, and money from new borrowing from the income calculation. Congress would have 10 years after the amendment's ratification to fully implement this requirement.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is essential for long-term fiscal health, forcing Congress to live within its means and preventing the accumulation of unsustainable national debt. They believe it instills discipline and accountability in federal spending.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that this provision is overly rigid, potentially forcing drastic cuts during economic downturns or emergencies, which could worsen recessions. They argue it removes necessary flexibility from Congress to manage the economy effectively.
Tradeoffs
The tension lies between fiscal discipline and economic flexibility. While it aims to control debt, it risks limiting the government's ability to use counter-cyclical fiscal policy or respond to unforeseen national needs without significant political hurdles.
Article --, Section 2
Emergency Exception to Balanced Budget
This section allows Congress to temporarily spend more than it takes in during emergency situations. To do so, a bill authorizing such excess expenditures must be approved by a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Any debts incurred from these emergency expenditures must be repaid "as soon as practicable."