Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Bill Number

H.J.Res. 110

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Economics and Public Finance

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-07-23: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-06-11T23:26:39Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This joint resolution (H.J. Res. 110) proposes an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to require the federal government to balance its budget annually or over multiple years, aiming to enforce fiscal discipline by limiting spending to available revenues, excluding borrowing.

Key Provisions

• Balanced Budget Requirement (Section 1): Total government expenditures must equal total receipts (revenues), though balancing can occur over more than one fiscal year. Expenditures exclude payments on existing debt, and receipts exclude funds from borrowing. Congress must achieve this balance within 10 years after the amendment's ratification.
• Emergency Exceptions (Section 2): In crisis situations, a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate can temporarily allow spending to exceed revenues for limited periods. Any resulting debt must be repaid "as soon as practicable" (meaning without undue delay).
• Ratification Process: The amendment becomes part of the Constitution if ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states within seven years of congressional approval.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Introduces a constitutional mandate for balanced budgets, which is not currently required under the U.S. Constitution or federal law. Existing budget processes allow deficits without such restrictions, relying instead on statutory limits like debt ceilings.
• Shifts from flexible fiscal policy (where Congress can authorize deficits via simple majorities) to a stricter framework, with supermajority requirements for exceptions and a 10-year transition period for compliance.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: Federal agencies may face reduced funding or forced prioritization of programs, potentially leading to cuts in discretionary spending (e.g., defense, education, or social services) to meet balance requirements.
• On Citizens: Could result in higher taxes, reduced government services, or slower economic stimulus during recessions, affecting everyday Americans through changes in entitlements like Social Security or healthcare. It might promote long-term fiscal stability, potentially lowering national debt and interest rates.
• On International Relations: Limits U.S. flexibility in global responses (e.g., foreign aid or military actions), which could influence alliances or economic leadership, as borrowing capacity for international commitments is curtailed.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Congress and Federal Government: Directly responsible for enforcement, with increased pressure on lawmakers to balance budgets and supermajority hurdles for emergencies.
• State Governments: Play a key role in ratification; successful states could see indirect benefits from a more stable national economy but might face competing federal funding priorities.
• Taxpayers and Citizens: Bear the brunt of any spending cuts or tax hikes needed for compliance, while benefiting from reduced federal debt over time.
• Financial Markets and Economy: Investors and businesses could gain from lower deficits, but short-term economic disruptions might occur during the transition.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Constitutional Implications: Adds a new enforceable article to the Constitution, potentially altering the separation of powers by constraining Congress's spending authority (Article I, Section 8) and requiring judicial enforcement if disputes arise. The 10-year grace period and multi-year balancing provide some flexibility, but vague terms like "emergency" or "as soon as practicable" could lead to legal challenges over interpretation.
• Legal Implications: Once ratified, it would override conflicting laws (e.g., allowing perpetual deficits), but implementation details (like enforcement mechanisms) would need congressional rules, possibly inviting court cases on compliance.
• Political Implications: Promotes debates on fiscal conservatism versus government flexibility; passage requires bipartisan supermajorities in Congress and broad state support, highlighting divisions between deficit hawks and those favoring expansive federal roles. If ratified, it could reshape election dynamics around budget priorities.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Moran, Nathaniel [R-TX-1]

Recent Actions

• 2025-07-23: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2025-07-23: Introduced in House
• 2025-07-23: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States. — issued 2025-07-23 — PDF (2 pages)