Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States requiring a balanced budget for the Federal Government.

Summary of H.J. Res. 139: Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment

This resolution proposes adding an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would require the federal government to spend no more money than it takes in each year — essentially a "balanced budget" requirement. Because it is a constitutional amendment, it would need approval from two-thirds of both the House and Senate, and then ratification by three-fourths of all state legislatures before it could take effect. This is a much higher bar than passing a regular law.

The amendment would directly affect how Congress and the President craft the federal budget each year. Under such a requirement, the government generally could not spend more than it collects in taxes and other revenues without some kind of special exception or override process. This could impact a wide range of federal programs and spending decisions, from national defense to Social Security, Medicare, and many other government services Americans rely on.

This proposal affects all Americans, since federal spending touches nearly every area of public life — including infrastructure, healthcare, education funding, disaster relief, and more. Supporters of balanced budget amendments typically argue it would promote fiscal responsibility and reduce the national debt. Critics often argue it could limit the government's ability to respond to economic downturns or emergencies when increased spending may be necessary.

The resolution recently came up for a vote in the House but fell short of the required two-thirds majority, failing 211–207. As a result, it did not advance, and the proposed constitutional amendment was not sent on to the Senate or the states for further consideration.