In politics, especially, it’s wise to keep an eye open for unintended consequences when changing a policy or regulation. A law can be a two-edged sword that turns back on the side that created it. Or the shot they fire can ricochet or boomerang.
For instance, those who think a balanced-budget amendment would cap federal government spending need to see where the bulk of it’s been going before they swirl the blade or press the trigger.
In effect, the cap would mean America could no longer wage war. And it would require taxing the super-rich far more than they’ve been paying. The rest of us can’t keep carrying the burden with less than half of the resources.
Yes, they’re hoping it will be the excuse to eliminate the remaining social services – the part of public spending that serves real people like us. Just look at the ones who claim to be tax-cutters when it comes to voting for budgets – they’re always increasing military spending.
Think about it. How do you think we got the national debt?
We were doing fine, under Clinton, until the Second Bush Iraq War. Just look.
And if you make an exception? That would fail the purpose altogether. Utterly.
Pay to play, then.
Some of us have had enough casino-style politics.
Some of us even want our money back, with interest.