America’s preoccupation with a t balanced budget amardrnent to the Constitution has gained intensity in recent weeks. leading toward a possible autumn showdown in the llonnse of Representativa. Although givlnw high prlority to a balanced federa budget at their justconcluded Oklahoma convene tion the nation’s governors dnlined by a single vote to support a cmstitutional amendment to enforce lt. Yet their test vote – on a simplIfld alternative tot the U.S. Senate-pssed amendment – was 75 to l0 In favor. barely under the three-fourths majority requirernunt of the National Governors Conference The Senate passed its measure 89:1 Aug. 4 with two votes more than the necusary twothirds margin. The proposal would require Congress to adopt balanced yearly federal budgets, allowing deficits only in wartlme orwhert both houses we threeftfths malorlty approval. o raise the national debt also would need a three-fifths majority vote. Momentum for an amendment has been building in recent years in the face of soaring deficit spqsdlrq which has doubled the national debt in the East seven years to beyond the Il trl lon mark. 1’he budget has been balanced only eight tinnes in a hall century and only once in the past 22 years. The govemment was debt-free in 1835 and owed only $16.2 billion 0311 per capital in 1580. whereas today’s massive debt pro-rates to about $18.000 per family according to administration figures. As for spending, it took 173 years – from 17 to l%Z – for federal outlays to reach a yearly total of $100 billion. in the20years since. expenditures have sltyrocketed all the way to the f781.5 hillton budgeted for fiscal 1983 which begins Oct. l. The awesome ‘llil deficit is Qlgured at $104 billion by the White ouse largest in history Congressional experts say it will go much higher Equally appealing fiscal ’83 interest of the national debt is estimated at $134 billion says U. S. News ft World Report. Annual interest has soared all the way from $8.3 billion in two decades. The enormous interest outlay currently makes the difference between a balanced budget and huge dehcits. Massive federal borrowing is hampering economic recovery and helping to keep interest rates high. Surveys consistently indicate three of four Americans Want a constttuttonal restraint on federal spending President Reagan sup ports an amendment saying only ”a thm wall of wavering willpower srtinds between us and nnin by red I Meanwhile. via another amendment route provided by the Constitution 31 state legislatures have launched a separate balanced budget initiative. Only M are needed to set “constitutlonal convention” machinery in motion for the first time on record. By either path the amendment must he ratified by three-fourths of the states tdfln to become part of the Constitution. Congressional action presumably would take precedence over the states’ initiative. The Senate having passed a balanced budget proposal the scene shifts to the House where an uphill figlnt is forecast. The House verslon is bottled up in the Judiciary Committee but observers believe political pressures will s ur a floor vote before the Nov. Z election. Arguments advanced against the amendment are varied. Though economic strength is at the very heart of the American system, some say iruerting “econnomic theory” would “trivlallze the Constltution.” The Senate vote. some claim was an election year cop-out by lawmakers unwilllng to say “no” to excessive spending. Be tlnat as it theradredinltrecordcrlesoot or some form of imposed discipline. Some argue a statute would be sufficient to force a balanced budget But in 1978 Congress passed Public Law 5-435 requiring that spending not exceed revenues as of 1981. The law has been ignored. Skeptics say we shou1dn’t tinker with formulas of the Founding Fathers. Yet 16 constitutional amendments are in effect. Moreover Washington Jefferson and Madison among others. spoke out forcefully against public debt. Notwithstanding the various arguments, wlnat better choice exists in the continuing budget crisis than a constitutnona mandate? Fiscal responsibility must be restored. The Herald believes the House of Representatives by all means should pass the amendment to start the ratification process . in the states. The amendment – conscious. heavily – taxed public is untitled to a chance to support or reject the idea through their state representatives. The ratification process takes years. Supporters say it could be adopted by the 1986-87 budget process at the earliest. If Congress meantime. proves it can balance. the budget without a cornstitutional amendment perhaps states may have no need to act. But if the budget makers continue toadd deficit to deficit, then the amendment machinery will be available to force them into line. V