Congress proposes constitutional straitjacket on federal spending
H.J.Res. 110 — Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States. · Filed by Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) · Introduced Jul 23, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This joint resolution proposes a constitutional amendment requiring the federal government to balance its budget (total spending equals total revenue) over time, with an exception for emergencies approved by a two-thirds vote in both chambers. Debt payments are excluded from the balance calculation. Congress would have ten years after ratification to achieve balance. Citizens would be affected through potential constraints on federal spending, tax policy, and the government's ability to respond to crises without a supermajority vote.
Why we flagged it
This is a joint resolution proposing a structural constraint on federal fiscal policy at the constitutional level. It is not a statute but a proposal for constitutional amendment, making it fundamentally different from ordinary legislation.
What the text implies
- A balanced budget requirement could force pro-cyclical fiscal policy (spending cuts during recessions), potentially deepening economic downturns and increasing unemployment.
- The amendment excludes debt service from the balance calculation, meaning interest payments on existing debt are not counted as expenditures—this creates a structural incentive to prioritize debt payments over other spending.
The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
bond markets (reduced federal borrowing demand may lower Treasury yields); fiscal conservatives and deficit-reduction advocates