Debt Ceiling Countdown: An Explainer

Here we go...again?

By

Price St. Clair walks us through the ongoing debt ceiling fight in an interview with Ben Ritz, Director of the Center for Funding America’s Future at the Progressive Policy Institute. The two discuss the nuances of the issue, including:

-Throwbacks to 2011

-Trump’s lack of “caps”

-Likely (and worst case) scenarios

Create a free account
Access additional articles and newsletters for no cost, no credit card information needed. Continue ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By
Comments (12)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Kurt.Woolley

    Frustrating that Price St. Clair didn't push back in any way to the guest's framing of the situation, which was not very evenhanded in my mind. For once in a debt limit discussion, I wish the debaters would differentiate between the legal debts that the US has issued (bonds, bills, etc), which were the subject of the 14th amendment, and the political 'obligations' that the government has incurred by promising to make certain payments (salaries, ss, contract payments, etc). There is no question that the 14th amendment requires that the US pay off its debt obligations and can't renege; however, the US could defer payments (not great, Bob!) on those debts without 'questioning' their validity. On the other hand, the US could say that it didn't have enough money to make future salary payments or pay for other activities going forward without issuing more debt if tax receipts are too low. However, that is not a debt default...why can't people separate the two (both bad, admittedly) but different levels of bad and different political costs, as well.

    Collapse
  2. MathewA

    The guest was an idiot. The debt limit serves as a pain point, and has proven to be one of the few ways to reduce spending (even if only temporary).

    Moreover, there are plenty of reasons for why you would want a debt ceiling even if you had a fiscally sound government.

    For example, you estimate tax revenues will be 1 trillion for the year. You authorize 1 trillion of spending. Mid year, tax revenues come in lower than expected, a debt limit could force you to examine that mid year and decide whether to go into debt or lower expenses.

    Collapse
  3. Moorechaos

    Don't you worry about going too long, Jonah.

    Collapse
  4. Jrtownson

    Ok here's my plan. Us boomers aren't gonna solve the debt problem alone. How about if we charter a group of 20 or 30 year old smart people to solve the problem, or at least mitigate the effects. Sort of like Obamas debt commission, but in this case the young's have the most to gain or lose. The boomers in Congress will have to vote it up or down. Like a BRAC proposal.

    I realize as I write this how ludicrous it sounds getting 20 year olds to solve anything like this, but maybe with some fence posts on either side, balanced reps from both sides of spectrum, need a 2/3 majority to pass, etc, it could be useful. If it's too harebrained it just wont get passed by Congress.

    Pile on.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Rajeev

    Great summary of the history and present situation regarding the debt ceiling. Fighting on budgetary issues over the debt is stupid. It should be done during the budget and appropriations process and if a party feels so objecting to spending proposals then tie the cuts to the CRs.

    That being said, if the Republicans vote for a deal that includes work requirements for federal assistance, permitting reform and modest spending caps I will give them credit for sensible reforms even if the mechanism to get there was harmful.

    Collapse
    1. MathewA

      Since they debt limit seems to be the only time spending actually is cut, I think it's a great idea

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Whit Waldo

    Could we get a link to that 95-page guide to balancing the budget mentioned at the end of the episode in the show notes or at least the comments? I'd be interested to read more about the proposal.

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    J. Eric

    Like 👍🏽. Thanks

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Anne W (Raw5254)

    Team Jonah here. Yes! I would love to find a restaurant with a dress code, even if it was only on certain days. I’m frustrated by getting dressed up for a special occasion and now discovering that it’s basically my husband and me who are in the minority, even at upscale places.

    But why be surprised? Everywhere we go people look like slobs these days.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Rajeev

      I actually like the more casual lack of dress codes in theory. However I think it’s unfortunately been coupled with a lack of hygiene too. Especially when flying now I feel like the airports are more disgusting hygienically with more people than before seeming to have been not showered like campuses have always been in early morning classes.

      So I think that a dress code is nice because it generally couples with people taking time to get ready to go out and being a lot cleaner and better to be around. But I might just be snobbish because I’m ocd about always showering if I’m leaving the house for any reason.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Anne W (Raw5254)

        I don’t necessarily mind “casual.” For instance, I’d be perfectly happy if the couple at the next table were wearing slacks and polo shirts. What I’m tired of seeing is sloppy hiking shorts, t-shirts with “sayings,” sandals (flip flops and Crocs!), and you get the idea. I appreciate people taking a little bit of effort, pretending at least, that they care about how they appear to others. My husband and I don’t go all out, but it’s nice seeing him, every so often, wearing a nice shirt with a jacket, and kaki pants. I’ll usually go for a nice top, slacks and some nicer shoes. No big deal, and I don’t think that’s snobbish.

        Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Gabrielle G

    Thank you for this refreshingly sane explainer

    Collapse