America’s opportunity with the debt ceiling
January 10, 2013 at 10:50 am in News by Dustin Siggins 8 Comments
On Friday, liberal Washington Post blogger Greg Sargent provided a very solid analysis on how the debt ceiling is likely to be a problem not for President Obama, but for the Republican Party. He concluded with the following:
If Republicans are willing to force a choice between destroying the economy and gutting popular social programs, let them wallow in that winning message. If they’re willing to tank the economy to get what they want — after taking a shellacking in the election and proving so dysfunctional that they could not pass tax cuts for everyone but the ultra-wealthy without substantial Democratic help — then it’s on them. Just leave it there.
Sargent’s analysis is worth reading in full, because he is absolutely right. If the Republican Party thinks in the traditional, short-sighted ways of Washington (Sargent notes Speaker Boehner and Newt Gingrich have already come out on the record as speaking in this fashion), the debt ceiling will indeed doom it in the eyes of the public. It will also largely eliminate the party’s already-reduced ability and willingness to hold strong on solving the overspending problem in Washington.
However, this is not a certainty as of yet. Here is one strategy the GOP can use the debt ceiling to help the country:
1. First, at no time in the last few years has the GOP effectively explained the impact of the national debt on the American people. There has been no widespread effort to talk about the academic data showing the debt is likely slowing our economy’s growth or how those who oppose reforming Medicare and Social Security are the ones driving the programs to bankruptcy. There has been almost no explanation of the threat of inflation, or how to best reform the tax code for the benefit of all Americans.
2. Second, Tea Party-minded Members of Congress need to explain to the American people that breaching the debt ceiling is not a default on America’s debt. This is a common misconception in the public, largely due to misleading media reports and political statements. The fact is that hitting the debt ceiling would simply mean the federal government would have to balance the budget in one day. Social Security, Medicare, defense, and interest payments could all be covered, with a small amount of room to spare.
Will it cause pain? Absolutely. Is that pain less than what the nation will face if we hit the entitlement fiscal cliff coming our way? Without doubt.
3. Third, those who want spending cuts in exchange for an increase in the debt ceiling, or who oppose raising the ceiling at all, must rebut partisan and inaccurate statements like the following from Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA):
We raise the debt ceiling for a simple reason: to pay our bills. As President Obama said this week, Congress can’t stop paying the tab for things that Congress has already approved.
Many politicians and other Americans appear to believe the debt ceiling is about future bills. This is not true. As pointed out on this blog on Monday:
The debt ceiling does not get raised to pay bills already in hand. It goes up to pay for future spending. It also gives the current Congress the chance to check the fiscal irresponsibility of past Congresses, who do not have to deal with the consequences of their decisions.
Also, there is nothing that says Congress can’t stop paying the tab for anything. Certainly, for example, the implicit promises in Social Security and Medicare won’t continue if/when those programs go bankrupt. And considering that the fiscal cliff debate was entirely about overturning spending cuts initiated by the same politicians 16 short months earlier, why can’t Congress also overturn its intent to deficit-spend?
4. Sargent makes the very valid point that Republicans could very well be tarred by the debt ceiling debate. However, remember that the very centrist House Republican budget proposal was derided as shoving Grandma off the cliff, and Speaker Boehner’s Plan B was declared to be too conservative. Basically, no matter what the Republicans do, their party is going to get hammered in many media circles.
Rather than ignore this reality, or shrugging it off, Tea Party-minded Members of Congress need to get their message about the necessity of stopping overspending ready for launch. The attacks against them have already started, and there is a definite need for effective combating the many misleading claims being publicized. While we all wish we lived in a world of perfectly unbiased media, the reality is very different, and to not blunt its impact is an error many in the GOP have made during the fiscal debates over the last two years. And the nation will continue to suffer if this error is not fixed.
5. Related to Point 4, fiscal conservatives should stand tall and speak the truth: if the GOP is harmed through tough negotiating on the fiscal cliff, the consequences are worth dealing with. The GOP is not trying to shut the government down. It is merely providing a framework under which the government will spend less in the future. To paraphrase Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), we are going to have to cut spending soon. The question is whether the country will do it voluntarily, or if our debtors will make those decisions. Not taking care of overspending now will cause a great deal more harm to the poor, seniors, and others proponents of big government claim to care about than any breach of the debt ceiling.
One of the major problems in Washington is that politics is treated like a football game – join one “team” or the other. A political party or movement should always be a means to an end, not an end in and of itself, yet that is how many Republicans and Democrats view themselves. Tea Party-minded Members of Congress must prevent themselves from falling into this trap. After all, does it matter if the GOP is harmed as a party if the nation as a whole is saved from a fiscal collapse?
History shows Sargent’s analysis is correct; the GOP will fail to hold the line on spending cuts as we get closer to the debt ceiling, and the nation will continue to pile debt on the backs of young Americans. Tea Party-minded Members of Congress and activists must have an effective strategy going into these debates in order that the debt ceiling is used as an American opportunity instead of a failure.
Tea Party-minded members of Congress = Treason-minded members of Congress.
If being a Tea Party member, standing for fiscal responsibility, and less govt = being a traitor, so be it. Spending like a drunken sailor does not work in personal budgeting, and works less on a larger scale as a country.
Grow up !
The makers have had it.
I am one American that is completely fed up with the lies, the stresses caused by wondering what is going to happen in the future. What I have decided is that there is no bank anywhere that would allow me to spend more than I make EVER. We all put our pants on one leg at a time, unless we are an American Veteran or another unfortunate soul that lost a limn in service to our Great America! ( or in the case of someone injured for some other reason). Stop spending, stop ruining our country STOP it. Let America do what we do best, create, invent, and lead.
Obama is doing his best to ruin America in line with his goal to bring Communism to America. He raised taxes on the Job Creators. He doesn’t understand that rich people create jobs and companies so they can get richer. If they can’t get richer they will just sit around on their yacht or play polo. Many will migrate to the Isle of Man or the Cayman Islands. Then America will have to import Job Creators from India or China or we will become a 3rd world country of migrant farmers and goat herders.
I wish I could go to my boss & Say I have set my budget for the next 12 months & what I have planned to Spend is three (3) times the amount you are paying me at this time, SO I will be needing a raise to meet that expense.. I can tell you what he would Say…
In my mind, there are two separate issues being merged into one. The first issue is excessive spending which is creating debt beyond our means to manage and the second is the Debt Ceiling.
The House of Representatives, Constitutionally, has the sole power of the purse. Any and all funding necessary to implement and maintain the laws which are passed by Congress originates within the House. (Although Congress, on a regular basis, circumvents that requirement by the Senate originating legislation that is later attached as an amendment to legislation originating in the House.) I would guess that EVERY piece of legislation that is passed also includes spending authorizations (in the form of amendments) which are NOT subject matter related to the basic bill being voted upon and processed into law.
It is my understanding that the sum total of all legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the executive exceeds the revenue taken in to cover the expense of the commitments established by law. Thus, we are now and have been engaged in a deficit spending situation.
The Debt Ceiling is a law that was put into place to give Congress oversight over deficit spending. It requires the federal government (all three branches thereof) to limit the amount of spending to a specified amount. The law does allow for modification or increases if and when the country’s fiscal situation necessitates additional spending (unanticipated wars and economic crisis).
In my view, using the Debt Limit as “LEVERAGE” in order to negotiate a reduction in spending is inappropriate and unnecessary. Mr. Gingrich is very correct that this tactic is a losing tactic for the Republicans. In my view, the American public (Democratic, Republican and Independent) knows and understands the need to gain control of deficit spending; the American public (Democratic, Republican and Independent) knows and understands the process of gaining such control is going to be painful and hurt everyone to some degree; and the American public is willing to suffer the pain so long as it is shared equitably among ALL Americans and the solution is implemented in a slow and progressive fashion so as to mitigate the amount of pain being suffered. (ie: cutting too much too fast will damage the overall economy and create more harm than good).
Congress HAS the authority to pass legislation that reduces spending. There is no need for an executive budget or any other source outside the House. There is no need for any “GRAND BARGAIN” between Congress and the Executive. There is no need for smoke and mirrors or gimmicks that can and will be changed at a later date (kicking the can down the road). They control spending by the budget process (or in the alternative Continuing Resolutions). If they try to manage the funding allocation process by closing department, they will face fierce opposition and there efforts will go nowhere. That has been their efforts to date and has resulted in grid-lock. If, however, they simply reduce the funding by a reasonable amount (say one or two percent from the current levels) it will be seen as reasonable and will move the country in the right direction. They will, more than likely, get the votes in the Senate to put the legislation on the President’s desk and put the pressure on him to sign or veto the bill. The key to getting it passed the Senate is the cuts/reduction has to be seen as REASONABLE by the Senate and, more importantly, by the public.
Instead of taking a REASONABLE approach to solving the fiscal problems we face, they continue to submit “IN-YOUR-FACE” legislation such as repeal of Obamacare and defunding Planned Parenthood. In my view, they continue to use fiscal rationalization to implement their social agenda. That is unacceptable to me and to the majority of the American public. It is a “sham” that the American public has rejected and will continue to reject.
The solution to our fiscal problems can be found by intellectual assessment and compromise rather than confrontation and emotionalist ideology. It makes more sense to me to have slow, but steady progress towards a solution than it does to fight a battle in which all participants are destined to lose the war!!
Joe – I totally agree. A scorched earth policy is bad for the country and our long term economic growth. However, I think many in the Tea Party would prefer to ruin the country rather than see it prosper under Obama. Cut off our nose to spite our face…
But people don’t see that this policy against Obama will only weaken the conservative movement.
republicians need to grow some balls!!!!!!!! Obomination is the most unpatriotic heretic in this country!!!! One things for sure, he does not beleive in liberty.