THE United States Constitution is hard to amend, and rightly so. If changes could be made with a simple majority of both chambers of Congress, the rights and obligations on which the republic is founded might be swept away before the whims and fashions of politics. The requirement of a two-thirds majority for constitutional change exists to stop a populist, but untenable, amendment from damaging the framework of government.
The Republican majority's failure to push through a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget is a victory for the wisdom of the founders of the republic. Thanks to the Senate's conservatism, Congress has failed to require itself to achieve a target which it has shown is beyond its skill and desire to achieve. Fiscal responsibility is essential. But governments also need flexibility to cope with changing circumstances. There are times (such as during recessions) when a deficit budget is desirable. If Congress had been forced to pare spending - or raise taxes - to balance the budget, altering interest rates would be the only tool for influencing economic developments.
The US economy would have been held to ransom by the demands of Washington accountants. The amendment would have permitted flexibility in time of war - which cynics might see as an invitation to keep America in a state of permanent war. But unless the amendment were to have been flouted by accounting tricks, it might have left Washington unable to fund basic programmes needed for a fair society or to stimulate growth, when a boost was needed.
The Republicans have not given up: a balanced budget amendment will become a key issue in the next presidential election. But what is needed is a Congress with the courage of its convictions, willing to balance the budget most of the time - while being able to boost spending or cut taxes when it is necessary.