Should the debt ceiling be eliminated?

[mlyonsd]

The Obama administration has suggested eliminating the debt ceiling which would allow the executive branch to borrow how much money they want.

Good idea or not?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

You are obviously clueless (or pretending to be for some reason) about the issues relevant to the so-called "debt ceiling." As stated before, it is about paying bills for debts already owed.

It's about borrowing more money.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

It is for money Congress\POTUS has already approved. It is useless

I assume you mean "spending".

[Buzz_TinBalls]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

It's a totally ****ed up idea. We pay the money that we owe. We don't default on our loans.

R's, you want to quit spending money, your in control of Congress. GIT-R-DONE.

b-b-b-b-b-but that dem president

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by WoodDraw

Yeah, of course. There's just no logical replacement. That's why it's insane to be messing with default.


I'm all for a discussion/fight over the deficit. And there are ways to do it with a gun point at your head, if that's your thing (government shutdown, for one), but to use the debt limit...

Why would the government have to default? Why couldn't they just stop sending out SS checks instead? Or stop buying bullets and tanks for DoD?

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by patteeu

I assume you mean "spending".

sure. Still pointless.

[FD]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Again, debt ceiling votes are specifically about borrowing money, not about paying it back.

With debt payments needing to regularly roll over, if Congress doesn't pass a bill slashing appropriations to meet revenue minus interest, and if they also don't approve a debt ceiling increase, then it is about paying it back. They are typically debating just the ceiling half, which means if they dont pass it we default on the debts we owe.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by FD

With debt payments needing to regularly roll over, if Congress doesn't pass a bill slashing appropriations to meet revenue minus interest, and if they also don't approve a debt ceiling increase, then it is about paying it back. They are typically debating just the ceiling half, which means if they dont pass it we default on the debts we owe.

In a scenario where the debt ceiling hasn't been adequately increased, the executive branch can make debt service the top priority for available funds and avoid default.

[FD]

Originally Posted by patteeu

In a scenario where the debt ceiling hasn't been adequately increased, the executive branch can make debt service the top priority for available funds and avoid default.

I doubt that would be legal, in the long run.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by FD

I doubt that would be legal, in the long run.

I can't think of any reason for it to be illegal, unless Congress passed a law specifying spending priorities.

[FishingRod]

Originally Posted by FD

With debt payments needing to regularly roll over, if Congress doesn't pass a bill slashing appropriations to meet revenue minus interest, and if they also don't approve a debt ceiling increase, then it is about paying it back. They are typically debating just the ceiling half, which means if they dont pass it we default on the debts we owe.

I think that is the point of the Grandstanding by the conservatives last time. When all we have to do is borrow and borrow and borrow no one pays attention to the bills racking up but, if something had to get cut to pay for the other expenses, people might actually notice. Obviously we need to pay our bills but at some point we are going to have to have some correlation between revenue and expenditures.

[Ugly Duck]

Hilarious! Repubs in complete disarray.....

Sen. Mitch McConnell filibusters own bill on debt ceiling when Democrats agree to vote

WASHINGTON — In the span of hours, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Thursday challenged Democrats to an immediate vote giving President Barack Obama unilateral power to increase the nation’s borrowing limit, then reversed course and blocked his own bill when Democrats agreed.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., who was presiding over the Senate, grinned and said she had “whiplash,” an obvious reference to McConnell’s sudden course reversal.

After witnessing the exchange, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., told his colleagues, “I think we have now reached a new spot in the history of the Senate we have never seen before.”

“I am going to ask the parliamentarian to look into this,” Durbin said. “I do not think this has ever happened before.”

Reid issued a statement on Friday saying he would continue to press for a vote on the debt ceiling.

“After leading 385 filibusters in recent years, Senator McConnell took obstruction to new heights by filibustering his own bill,” Reid said. “Republicans’ obstruction and intransigence turned the last debt ceiling fight into a disaster for the middle class. We should give American families the security of knowing we will never go through such a harmful ordeal again.”

[FD]

Business leaders siding with Obama on debt ceiling?
By Greg Sargent , Updated: December 6, 2012

One interesting political dynamic right now is that Obama is working to enlist the support of business leaders to prevent another debt ceiling standoff next year. House Republicans are thinking about caving now on the middle class tax cuts — then coming back next year and staging another 2011 style debt ceiling battle to win the deep entitlement cuts they want. Business leaders are cool to the possibility, because such standoffs risk damaging the economy.

I’ve just learned that one of the most influential business groups in Washington, the Business Roundtable, is prepared to support a provision designed to dramatically minimize the possibility of another standoff now and in the future — one also supported by the White House. This is a step forward for White House efforts to prevent a 2011-style battle, which led to a credit downgrade for the United States, and widespread fears that the country would go into default.

Obama — who is refusing to negotiate over the debt ceiling again — supports a measure called the “McConnell provision,” a proposal pushed by Mitch McConnell last year to try to defuse the crisis. Under the provision, the president can request a debt limit hike, after which Congress can vote to deny the request by disapproving of it. The president can then veto that request, and unless Congress overrides that veto with a two-thirds vote in both houses, it is honored. The provision transfers most control over the debt ceiling to the President and makes it far harder for the opposing party in Congress to block hikes — meaning the constant threat of default, and the ability to engage in brinksmanship around it, are effectively removed.

The McConnell provision was passed as a temporarily measure as part of last year’s debt ceiling compromise but would need to be extended now. The White House has proposed extending it; if that happens, House Republicans would not be able to stage a meaningful standoff next year.

I’m told reliably that the Business Roundtable will support the McConnell provision if it’s proposed again in Congress.

This underscores the rising determination among business leaders — many of whom are aligned with the GOP — to avoid a rerun of the 2011 debacle. Obama is aggressively lobbying these business leaders, publicly and privately, to make their opposition to another standoff known. And it appears that they are doing so. As Politico’s Ben White reports today, executives are privately beginning to coalesce around the McConnell provision as a means to that end.

The prospect of another debt ceiling fight puts the House GOP in an interesting spot, pitting its Tea Party wing against more pragmatic GOP-aligned interests in the business community. While the former will be spoiling for another fight, the latter appears far less willing to see the country dragged through another deeply damaging round of debt ceiling brinksmanship — with the full faith and credit of the United States, and the economy, at stake — this time around.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-debt-ceiling/

[alnorth]

Yes. I'll also note that the poll options were hilariously worded, very dishonestly.

Congress already decided to spend the money when they passed budget deficits. Congress could have instead passed budgets which are balanced or in surplus.

Prior congresses and presidents decided to spend the money. The current congress and president is unwilling or unable to balance the budget. At that point, you either borrow or default.

The very concept of the debt ceiling is stupid.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

You don't think every business has a limit where no one will lend them more money?

That point, for the USA, would be when a treasury auction fails. It is not arbitrarily deciding not to borrow more money.

The proper comparison would be if the bank assures a business owner that they can borrow more money if they need it, and the business owner thinking thats too much money to owe, I'll just either stop paying a couple bills, or default on my current loan to the bank.

[Stewie]

Of course! The end game is fiat "currency."