From his quiver of far-out ideas, he's brought up the Balanced Budget Amendment, again.
Think of the millions of unemployed we'd have if we had a balanced budget amendment during this past crisis. Can you imagine how the sharks would have had their knives out for U.S. securities, knowing that the "full faith and credit" of the U.S. government was capped, so that we were hiking taxes (or cutting spending) into a vicious cycle of economic contraction? We'd probably have no auto industry in the U.S., except by what is run by the lavishly spending rest-of-world. USA business-cycle-amplifier bonds for sale! Get 'em while they are hot!
What's more, for a group who don't believe in regulation, isn't a Constitutional Amendment the ultimate in "regulation"? One can only think back to 2001, when Robert Rubin and the rest of the brain trust decided that there could be no "rule" for when and by how much to cut taxes, because (as best I recall), his view was that people would just game the rules. Coming from Wall Street, one imagines some authority behind such a view.
Note:
The Huffington Post editors did not pick up that Rand Paul assertion that the average income for Federal Employees is $120,000 is inaccurate, more hype and hyperbole than fact, because it's so far off from the truth, which is about a 11% difference in average pay ($7K). Nor does he mention that the Federal government collects taxes at a higher rate on higher salaried employees, even Federal ones.