ABSTRACT
Our nation's federal budget deficit looms large at almost $8.5 trillion, enough to hold each and every American accountable for at least $27,494 of that debt.[1] And, given the size of today's federal deficit, in 1985 and 1987 it was this very premise under which the Gramm–Rudman–Hollings (GRH) Act was enacted in a desperate attempt to keep the federal government's deficit, and in turn the national debt, from spiraling out of control. Today's deficit woes would suggest, that although admirable in principle, the goals of GRH have not been realized. But, according to former Senators Phil Gramm (R-Texas) and Warren Rudman (R-New Hampshire), two of the three sponsors of the Act and for whom the Act was partly named, "Those who call the 1985 Gramm–Rudman–Hollings balanced budget law a bad law because deficit targets have been missed and accounting gimmicks have been used to avoid tough decisions would probably also suggest that religion is a failure because there are a few saints in the world."[2] At a time of partisan rancor and an ever increasing federal budget deficit, GRH appeared to represent the best of few alternatives to get the nation's fiscal house in order.
