Braley's turkey

U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley says we need to amend the Constitution to make Congress fiscally responsible.

He took to our opinion pages Sunday to argue for a balanced-budget amendment. It's an election year, so I understand why Braley, a Democrat, would seek some inoculation from that old tax-and-spend label. Whichever Republican wins the right to face him this fall also will be pushing for an amendment. Better to soar with the deficit hawks than be a sitting duck, I guess.

But as policy, it's a turkey. And God as my witness, I don't think that turkey can fly.

Basically, I'm unimpressed with any pitch for a balanced-budget amendment that isn't attached to a list of what, exactly, the brave pitcher would carve up to make spending and income balance. Backers want us to believe the amendment is a magic wand that makes only bad, wasteful or unpopular spending disappear.

It's not a wand, it's a big ol' butcher's knife. And any politician intent on wielding it for political gain, while hoping to keep his or her apron white as snow, isn't really serious. The amendment would force deep cuts with real, lasting impacts. Where do you start slicing and dicing, congressman?

It's one thing to endorse a mechanism designed to balance the budget. It's something else entirely to endorse the actual cuts needed to make the mechanism work. And I seriously doubt his GOP opponent will do any better.

And in return for all that pain, will we really get a more responsible and responsive government?

Braley and other backers point to states for proof of budget-balancing virtues. But the truth is, state budgets get balanced using some really lousy, dishonest tactics - off-budget scooping, dipping, smoke and mirrors galore. States also depend heavily on federal funding, bucks that an amendment would make scarcer. State responsibilities, however, would likely grow.

And in trying to make Congress more responsible, it might become even less responsive. The scramble for a more limited federal pie would only intensify the lobbying stampede and campaign cash onslaught. Average Americans hoping to have their problems addressed would have an even tougher time getting heard. K Street still routs Main Street. And the notion of threatening members with a pay cut if they fail to balance the budget would ring pretty hollow in a Capitol filled with millionaires.

The amendment Braley supports would allow a two-thirds vote to break spending limits in the event of a “crisis,” creating yet another mechanism that places the fate of critical legislative decisions in the hands of an agitated minority with the power to endlessly stall or block. Call it the crisis filibuster. And although the amendment clamps down on spending, it places no limits on tax cuts, which can be just as ill-conceived and reckless.

America has had leaders who balanced budgets without a constitutional mandate. It takes tough compromises and sacrifices, not political gimmicks dusted off every election year.