(2 of 4)
Others are not so sure. They cite the example of the first Constitutional Convention, which was called to amend the Articles of Confederation and ended up forming a completely new government. Barber Conable, a conservative Republican Congressman from upstate New York, warns against "constitutional Russian roulette." Such a convention, says Constitutional Scholar Raoul Berger, would be "the town meeting of town meetings." Inevitably, he feels, delegates would press for such causes as making affirmative action mandatory, outlawing abortion, banning school busing, reducing the power of the judiciary. Says Howard Jarvis, apostle of California Proposition 13 but no fan of the convention route to achieve his goals: "A convention would give every crackpot a chance to write the supreme law of the land."
As some liberals contemplate this approaching forum, they fantasize a runaway mob repealing the entire Bill of Rights. Others are less anxious about such a possibility. Says Jerry Brown: "The idea that the American people want to junk the Bill of Rights is absurd. I think the American people believe in the Bill of Rights, and they also believe in a balanced budget. The idea that all the giants lived in the 18th century shows the same lack of confidence that is troubling this country in other respects." Senate Minority Leader Howard Baker is also unperturbed. A Constitutional Convention, he feels, would "limit itself. I have a fundamental confidence in the people who would attend."
any conservatives and liberals alike doubt the wisdom of requiring an annual balanced federal budget. In a period of recession, they argue, a deficit may be necessary to stimulate the faltering economy. Says Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd: "At the very time when flexibility is needed to deal with serious economic fluctuations, an absolute requirement to balance the budget would tie the hands of Congress."
Conservatives fear that the Government would be tempted to balance the budget by raising taxes rather than cutting spending. Many of them favor an amendment proposed by, among others, Economist Milton Friedman. Instead of a flat requirement that the budget be balanced, Friedman urges limiting any increase in annual spending to the amount of growth in the gross national product; if the rate of inflation exceeded 3%, however, the spending increase would be trimmed. In times of emergency a two-thirds vote of Congress could authorize additional outlays. "In a sense, the Government has always balanced its budget," says Friedman, "if not by what we call taxes, then by the hidden tax, of inflaion." Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Ford, agrees. There is no way of writing an amendment to ensure a balanced budget, he believes. The complexities are insuperable. He favors an amendment that would require all money kills to be passed by a two-thirds vote in both Houses of Congress, instead of the present simple majority.