In the afterglow of their electoral revolution, Republican lawmakers claimed that American voters nearly unanimously supported a proposed balanced budget amendment, but as legislators realize that difficult political decisions must be made, the focus has shifted to another issue.

While both houses of Congress are now concentrating on measures to prohibit unfunded federal mandates -- laws that force states to pay for federal programs --questions still remain about earlier discussion of the Fiscal Responsibility Act. The first component of the Republicans' "Contract With America" would provide for a balanced budget amendment and a presidential line-item veto.

The main impetus for a balanced federal budget has been that spending on interest of a consistently ballooning deficit is eating away at money that could be used for other causes.

"The concern is that you end up spending so much more on interest than you end up spending on other things," said Robert Lee, professor of hotel, restaurant and recreation management and public administration.

With deficit spending, the budget gets locked up on interest and there are no funds left for other items, Lee said.

"You're paying in the future on something you enjoyed in the past," he said.

Although there are problems with deficit spending, Lee said a balanced budget amendment is not necessarily the best solution.

"It tends to be kind of gimmicky," he said. Voters think that if Congress passes it all problems will go away, he said.

The current federal budget is grossly out of balance, Lee said, and the amendment would require massive cuts.

Those cuts are the source of the problems that Republicans have faced because Democrats have proposed that spending cuts be identified before passage of the amendment.

Political leaders are afraid to cut back on spending programs, but at the same time they speak in support of a balanced budget amendment, Lee said.

"The two just don't go hand in hand," he said.

The inability to come up with a compromise on the federal budget suggests that the United States has more than just an economic problem.

"It's not a problem with our economy, the problem is with our political leaders and what citizens ask them to do," Lee said.

Just as politicians have disagreed on the issue of a balanced budget, University students also possess varying views.

If the government could create a balanced budget without cutting too many government programs, John Marks (junior-speech communications) said he would support it.

"It seems maybe that if they have a balanced budget they wouldn't have as much of a deficit," Marks said. "If we can cut the deficit it will help our economy."

However, Sarah Smith (sophomore-nutrition) said she doubts Congress will be able to successfully balance the budget.

"I think it's so far out of reach," Smith said. "I really don't think they're going to get it down."

Instead of cutting public funding, Smith said Congress should concentrate on cutting "luxury" spending for legislators such as travel and living expenses.

Despite opposition to the measure and the shift in focus to unfunded federal mandates, the House Judiciary Committee has continued working on the balanced budget amendment and will be editing the bill today.

Sam Stratman, press secretary for the Judiciary Committee, said the bill is expected to be brought to the House floor for a vote the week of Jan. 23.

Before that date, House Republicans hope to prohibit unfunded federal mandates in order to allay the fears of several governors who have expressed disapproval of a balanced federal budget.

"States are leery that the federal budget will be balanced on the backs of state taxpayers," Stratman said. The prohibition of unfunded federal mandates will assure states that Congress is committed to reducing their financial burdens, he said.

Even though opponents to the balanced budget have questioned the feasibility of the massive spending cuts, Stratman said there is enough public support to assure the amendment's passage.

"There is a lot of public support for spending cuts," he said. "This government is big and it spends too much."

The Republicans will provide details about specific spending cuts later in the year.

"It is impossible for us to lay out right now what spending cuts will be made in six or seven years," Stratman said. "We are going to announce in April hundreds of billions of dollars in spending cuts."