THE HOUSE

Balanced-Budget Amendment

By a vote of 279 to 150, the House failed to achieve the two-thirds majority needed to approve a constitutional amendment (HJR 268) requiring the federal government to balance its budget each year. Deficit spending was to have been outlawed except during wartime or if three-fifths majorities of the House and Senate voted to permit it.

Supporter Charles W. Stenholm (D-Tex.) said lawmakers lack “courage and guts” to master the deficit and therefore “we need some help, an extra tool. We need a balanced-budget amendment.”

Opponent Jack Brooks (D-Tex.) said the measure “is filled with soft and fuzzy feel-good words that by themselves have no more legislative meaning than a bumper sticker that says ‘Have a Nice Day.’ ”

A yes vote supported the constitutional amendment.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Anderson (D) x Rep. Dornan (R) x Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Dymally (D) x Rep. Hawkins (D) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Roybal (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x

Balanced-Budget Statute

By a vote of 282 to 114, the House sent to the Senate a bill (HR 5258) requiring that the President and congressional budget committees draft balanced federal budgets each year showing the exact spending cuts and revenue hikes they recommend to stay out of the red. If Congress votes down the proposals, it would then pass a standard deficit-laden budget to run the government.

Democratic leaders produced the bill to counter the GOP plan (above) to balance the budget by constitutional amendment. They said it was important for balanced-budget advocates to state precisely how they would avoid a deficit. But Republicans denounced the bill as political cover for those who voted against the constitutional amendment.

A yes vote supported the Democratic bill.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Anderson (D) x Rep. Dornan (R) x Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Dymally (D) x Rep. Hawkins (D) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Roybal (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x

Proposed Cut in Farm Spending

By a vote of 202 to 216, the House refused to cut discretionary spending in a fiscal 1991 agriculture appropriations bill (HR 5268) by 2% across the board, saving $150 million. Exempted from the cut was to have been a nutritional program for poor infants and spending mandated by law. The $50.4-billion measure (HR 5268) was sent to the Senate.

Sponsor Timothy J. Penny (D-Minn.) said the “very modest” cut would help offset the bill’s 11.5% increase over 1990 spending.

Opponent Jamie L. Whitten (D-Miss.) said he believes in a balanced federal budget “but not at the expense of sound and essential programs.”

A yes vote supported the 2% cut.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Anderson (D) x Rep. Dornan (R) x Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Dymally (D) x Rep. Hawkins (D) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Roybal (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x