Critics: Debt Ceiling Could Hurt Colorado

WASHINGTON - The U.S. House is expected to vote this week on a proposal by Republican Tea Party members to amend the Constitution, mandating a balanced federal budget in exchange for increasing the debt ceiling. Critics of the plan warn it could have long-lasting negative consequences.

Rep. Mike Lee, R-Utah, claims his balanced-budget amendment is the only way to safeguard the nation against future lawmakers' actions. While a balanced federal budget may sound good in theory, says Debbie Weinstein, executive director of the Coalition on Human Needs, in practice it would hobble the federal government and slash funding for programs that serve the neediest Coloradans. 

"There's no talk of shared sacrifice, in which some of the richest among us at least pay a little bit of a share. Nothing like that."

Single working mothers and female retirees would be especially hard-hit if the constitutional amendment is approved, Weinstein says, prompting cuts to such safety-net programs as Social Security and the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program. She believes a more fair solution would be to reform the tax code, removing loopholes and having the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans pay slightly higher tax rates.

The safety-net programs, she says, help Coloradans, such as a laid-off worker in training for a new career, a woman who needs temporary financial help during a medical crisis, and others. 

"It's really about real people. People who've been saved from life-threatening illnesses, whose lives have been saved by Medicaid, not being able to get it anymore."

While balanced-budget laws may be workable in some states such as Colorado, Weinstein says, it's different for the federal government, because this type of law doesn't allow for any borrowing.

"We know that what has protected this country - kept it from going into even deeper recessions or even depressions - has been the ability of the federal government to deficit-spend, frankly, at times when it has to."

She says states, by contrast, can borrow money for necessary projects such as improving roads or other infrastructure.