The Sky’s the Limit on Debt Ceilings
Who says that Congress can’t get anything done? Say what you like about partisan gridlock, filibusters, obstruction on health care reform or disputes over military strategy, there’s one thing that the folks on the Hill are good at… spending your money.
Dems to lift debt ceiling by $1.8 trillion, fear 2010 backlash
In a bold but risky year-end strategy, Democrats are preparing to raise the federal debt ceiling by as much as $1.8 trillion before New Year’s rather than have to face the issue again prior to the 2010 elections.
“We’ve incurred this debt. We have to pay our bills,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told POLITICO Wednesday. And the Maryland Democrat confirmed that the anticipated increase could be as high as $1.8 trillion — nearly twice what had been assumed in last spring’s budget resolution for the 2010 fiscal year.
I’m sorry, but did you really just say “bold but risky?” I’d like to write more on this subject, but I woke up today greeted by that headline and decided to just go the hell back to bed.
9 Responses to “The Sky’s the Limit on Debt Ceilings”
You have to wonder why the even spend time on budgets, they certainly can't hold to one.
Is this supposed to be a shot at the majority party? One would have thought that the last 30 years would disabuse anyone of the thought that the Republic Party was the party of the balanced budget.
The Democrats will respond to this challenge the way they always have – by blaming it on Republicans.
Did I mention either party? The GOP under Bush and their pre-2006 majority were also spending like drunken sailors (though not with quite the temerity we're seeing this year) and lots of us complained about it then. They're just carrying on a fine old tradition of Congress having no concept of limits to fiscal irresponsibility. But if you must, then yes… today the D's are the ones perched in the majority offices as well as the White House, so if they shoot the cap through the roof again, they take the hit for it this time.
The Republicans will respond to this challenge the way they always have – by blaming it on Democrats.
Also, even people who are concerned about the deficit are unwilling to support any old cuts at all. Some are quite willing to object strenuously to cuts they don't like. (I don't support any old cuts at all, either–but I do not see the value in demonizing any cuts.)
I really don't know what happened back in the Ross Perot days. I would like to think that tackling the deficit would earn political points for the party that did it. But I'm aware that every dollar spent by the government has a constituency that will be unhappy if it gets cut out of the budget.
Yup, the government Nanny giving gifts to the dependent and/or loyal boys and girls trumps all. The umbillical cord gets cut when they enter the grave.
The Republicans will respond to this challenge the way they always have – by blaming it on Democrats.
Undoubtedly you're right, and I should have been more complete in my comment. The GOP hold the lion's share of the blame for how we got here, but the Democrats now hold the responsibility for getting us out of it. I don't see how huge stimulus packages, gifts to Wall Street and auto companies, escalating Afghanistan, and expensive new programs accomplish that. Irresponsibility by the GOP doesn't justify irresponsibility by Democrats.
Right now the GOP has little power (and often seems to want to make itself even less powerful) so while blaming things on the GOP may be cathartic and even accurate, it is not very productive. The Democrats on the other hand hold tremendous power and should be expected to be fiscally responsible. If they fail they should rightly be called on it.
The D's should run things like the R's used to do it when Bush was in office. All war expenses were placed “off budget” so the budget deficits don't look as bad.
“blaming it on Republicans”
Well, of course. But even if the GOP isn't handy for fradulent arguments, there is still the “need” to “spend [and borrow] our way out of this recession.” That's not hack Krugman, but Obama who said it (with an additional fact added by me for completeness).