Constitutional amendment would let states veto federal borrowing, trigger automatic spending cuts
H.J.Res. 112 — Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States related to the public debt. · Filed by Eric Burlison (R-MO) · Introduced Aug 15, 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 proposed constitutional amendment would require the federal government to balance its budget unless borrowing is approved, cap total federal debt at 105% of current levels unless states approve increases by simple majority, and require the President to cut spending automatically if debt approaches the limit. It also mandates a two-thirds vote in Congress to raise income taxes, though a national sales tax replacing all income taxes would only need a simple majority.
Why we flagged it
The bill proposes a structural constitutional change to enforce balanced budgets and debt limits through automatic spending cuts and supermajority tax requirements. It is fundamentally a fiscal-governance mechanism, not a substantive policy change.
What the text implies
- Automatic spending cuts (impoundment) triggered at 98% of debt limit would bypass normal congressional appropriations process, concentrating power in the executive branch to unilaterally decide which programs are cut.
- State-legislature approval of debt increases creates a veto point outside federal democratic processes; rural/conservative states could block federal borrowing for urban infrastructure, healthcare, or defense regardless of national need.
The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
high-income households (reduced progressive taxation); consumption-tax advocates; fiscal-constraint advocacy groups