[Editor's note: this piece was co-authored by David Biddulph]
If current fiscal trends continue, the greatest threat to American prosperity won’t come from abroad; rather, it will come from Washington’s inability to control its own spending. For decades, federal outlays have grown faster than the incomes of the people who fund them. The result is a debt trajectory that compounds silently but relentlessly, shifting the burden of today’s decisions onto future generations. This is not just unsustainable, it is unjust.
Economists have long understood the solution. When government spending grows no faster than inflation plus population, the economy has room to expand faster than the state. Over time, that gap compounds into extraordinary gains for citizens. In fact, long-term models of such fiscal discipline show that real income per person can quadruple over 75 years, not by cutting spending outright, but by slowing its growth relative to the private economy.
The problem isn’t the idea, it’s the incentives. Congress has shown little ability, or willingness, to impose binding limits on itself. The recent failure of the House to advance a balanced budget amendment underscores the point. As Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington noted, the nation faces an “unsustainable debt trajectory.” Yet the institutional mechanisms to correct it remain stalled in politics.
Even the constitutional route, an Article V convention, could take years to materialize, and years more to produce a ratified amendment. There is a faster, constitutional path by letting the people act directly. Across the United States, citizens in initiative states have the power to amend their constitutions through petition and vote. We are organizing a nationwide campaign to use that power to impose a simple, enforceable rule: government spending growth cannot exceed the combined rate of inflation and population growth, unless voters explicitly approve it.
This approach is not theoretical. It is modeled on two of the most successful fiscal reforms in the modern world. In Colorado, voters adopted the Taxpayer Bill of Rights in 1992. TABOR limits the growth of state and local government revenue and spending, requires voter approval for tax increases, and mandates refunds when revenues exceed the cap. Despite repeated political efforts to weaken it, Colorado voters have largely preserved TABOR because it works: it restrains government growth while preserving democratic choice.
An even more compelling example comes from Switzerland. In 2001, Swiss voters approved the “debt brake” with an extraordinary 85 percent majority, and it went into effect in 2003. The rule ties federal spending to long-term economic growth and requires balance over the business cycle; deficits in downturns must be offset by surpluses in expansions. The results have been remarkable. Switzerland has maintained low debt, stable budgets, and one of the highest standards of living in the world. Government did not shrink; rather, it simply grew more slowly than the economy. And that difference has made all the difference.
Our proposal builds on these proven models but adds a uniquely strong accountability mechanism. In participating states, members of Congress who vote to exceed the spending cap would lose access to their party’s primary ballot. Voters would no longer be forced to wait for the next election cycle to express their disapproval; accountability would be immediate and direct.
Critics will argue that such reforms are too ambitious or too disruptive. But the real disruption is the status quo system in which spending grows unchecked, debt accumulates without constraint, and future generations are left to bear the cost.
Others will challenge the use of modern tools, such as secure e-signature technology, to qualify these initiatives for the ballot. Expanding access to the democratic process is not a flaw; instead, it is a feature. Properly implemented, these systems can verify voter identity, reduce costs, and make participation more accessible while strengthening the integrity of the process.
At its core, this effort is about restoring a fundamental principle: government should grow at a rate that the people can afford. It does not require cutting essential services. It simply requires discipline that aligns the growth of government with the growth of the nation itself.
The Founders placed their ultimate trust in the people. They gave Americans the right to petition their government and, in many states, the power to change it directly. The question now is whether we will use that power.
We can continue down a path of rising debt and declining opportunity, hoping that future leaders will solve the problem. Or we can act now through the constitutional tools already in our hands to restore fiscal balance and secure a future of rising prosperity.
Poulson is professor emeritus at the University of Colorado and on the Board of the Prosperity for US Foundation.