No, they should be allowed to do whatever they want.

You would have to be an economist to answer that question in order for anyone to place any degree of trust in your answer. There are so many variables that we the average citizen, though we'd like to think we know, have no clue about.

If it were as easy as picking a couple different taxes to raise and cutting spending in a few programs someone would have done it already for their own political gain.

__________________
George - LeftWingPost.com

Okay, I think you are making this a little more complicated than it needs to be. I don't really expect anybody posting in this forum to balance the budget. I just want to know if people feel the budget should be balanced and, if so, which policies they feel should be targeted first to work toward a balanced budget.

I read a lot of back and forth on what services the government should supply and how much they should tax Americans, and it seems to me that there is little regard for balancing the two.

I think the system of T-notes works fine, but only if we don't increase spending and set aside enough to pay for it.

And how do you control the size of the deficit?

Credit and deficit are not the same thing. Credit is money you don't have but can still spend. Deficit is money you didn't have but already spent.

I believe congresses pay should be tied to how bad the deficit is

__________________
Aint but three things in this world thats worth a solitary dime,
But old dogs and children and watermelon wine.
Tom T. Hall
http://www.politicalforum.com/group.php?groupid=43

And how exactly do we keep Congress from running a deficit every year for three decades if there are no requirements to balance the budget. As it stands, Congress has carte blanche to deficit spend so they use it. Their primary concern is to get re-elected, so they use their spending power for pork barrel projects directed at their state or district.

I feel there has to be some control on this free spending of money in congress. However, I don't deny a need to give them the ability to run a deficit in some extreme circumstances. Therefore, my answer is:

They should be required to balance the budget, with exceptions made in times of national emergency.

Now, defining a national emergency may be a little tricky, but I think we would still be better of this way than without any requirement at all.

As far as how balancing the budget should be done, I have already alluded to it earlier in this post - cut pork barrel spending! - would be a great start.