Two Questions about the Democrats

[erpowers]

John Kerry mentioned during the convention that he voted to balance the budget even though it was not a popular position in the Democratic party. Why were Democrats against balancing the budget? I know that the Republicans did not want J.C. Watts to be the majority leader. What were the reasons for some Democrats not wanting Harold Ford Jr. to run for or be minority leader?

[blm]

1. Kerry was for a balanced budget since he entered the Senate in 85.

Most Dems were not. I think they were against it because the way Reagan and Bush were running deficits, then social programs would need to be cut. However, a balanced budget would be a good thing for an administration that was fiscally responsible, say, if Gore had taken office after Clinton left with a significant surplus.

The dirty little secret in politics is that the Republicans don't really want a balanced budget amendment. They'll always make sure enough Repubs vote against so it never passes. Just like the flag burning amendment. They just use it to demagogue the issue for votes.

[RoyGBiv]

3. Exactly...

When the idea of a balanced budget was introduced with such fanfare in the 80's, it was intended as a wedge against so-called tax-and-spend Democrats. (This is how it was advanced, IOW.) It's real purpose was as an element of the overall extreme RW Republican scheme to bankrupt the government and force it to abandon anything but debt payment and defense.

Kerry took a longer view on the subject. If we had a BBA that really functioned as it would be perceived to function, for example, Bush's war in Iraq could not have been funded. More likely any such amendment would have some sort of emergency clause, but even then, the case for funding a war would have to have been made much more concretely and would have had to pass through more hurdles than it did. One function of a BBA is that it takes back congressional powers that have been deferred to the executive in the last 30 years or so.

I'm personally conflicted on a blanket BBA like one many states have. I think we could work there in steps, but it would require some actual future planning on the part of government for it to work properly. We likely never would have emerged from the Great Depression as we did without deficit spending. (We would have come out of it as the economic cycle naturally shifted, but with some very tragic results, possibly including large-scale famine and an organized criminal element more entrenched than it was in reality.) IOW, there are times when spending on credit can be necessary, if not necessarily desireable as a general practice. Any BBA that controls a country as complex and diverse as the US would have to be carefully considered.

[blm]

4. Well said. Thankyou.

.

[brainshrub]

2. I, for one, like the idea of a balanced budget amendment.

I know many Dems are against such an idea. And while I'm on the subject of un-Democratic-party ideas that I support... I also like the idea of a flat tax & term-limits.

The point is that being a Democrat is about believing that the govt has the duty to be a force for good for all Americans... after that it's all froth & bubble.