Lifting Debt Ceilings

An insolvent giant?  A colossus weighed down by debt?  This is the situation the United States finds itself in over the raising of the debt ceiling after the last one was hit on May 16.  Bills designed to do so have been voted down in the House.  The Obama administration has been trying to hammer out an arrangement with politicians on both sides of the aisle to keep the credit coming.  Amidst the chattering, a gloomy reality is facing the US voter and politician alike: On August 2, the United States may well go into default.

Many members of the Republican Party, showing yet again that voodoo economics is their m?tier, see little problem in sabotaging efforts to lift the ceiling.  The party of fiscal responsibility is anything but in recent years, and the term ‘debt’ is bound to send them over the edge in paranoid rage.  Rectifying the situation through more taxes (or closing tax loopholes) is a scant possibility for them, but nor are they in favour of enabling the facilities to borrow more.

With the stalling of any new bills to increase the ceiling, the Treasury is engaging in a series of gymnastic maneuvers.  The panic is gradually taking hold.  Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner took measures in May to halt investments in two big government pensions plans to enable the government to continue its borrowing regime.

The US chief of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke has also weighed into the debate, making the most crucial remarks so far.  US creditworthiness risks being flushed down the financial toilet if the limit is not raised.  ‘Failing to raise the debt limit would require the federal government to delay or renege on payments for obligations already entered into’ (News Herald, Jun 15).  In not doing so, the US risks having the role of the dollar undermined, damaging the value of Treasury securities in the global market, and ‘induce downgrades of U.S. government debt’.  His comments have been dismissed as ‘unhelpful’, begging the question what a ‘helpful’ suggestion might be.

What might be figured in any immediate solution?  Budget cuts could be thrown in the arrangement.  Moderate Republicans might well be won over, conceding to raising the debt ceiling if, in fact, amendments were made to trimming budget outlays.  But the problem then begins: what items?

With the US empire embroiled in conflicts it is not winning, a scaling down of military commitments would be a fabulous saving.  But historically, the holders of empire are not prudent with their budgets.  As Joshua Green of The Atlantic (May 6) explains, Congress and budgets is much like ‘having dinner at a restaurant and then haggling over the check.  But given the tenor of our politics, a more apt analogy might be bulimia.  First dinner, then…’

As Green reminds us, Congressman Richard Gephardt found himself in 1979 having to convince his colleagues to vote for an increase of the then debt ceiling (a relatively minute $1 trillion) with persistent ribbing.  ‘Did you vote for the appropriations bill?  The defense bill?  The highway bill?’  The moral is childishly simple: if you don’t want to spend, don’t vote for a bill that incurs costs.

In any cost cutting exercise, the easy targets are almost the most damaging at home: medical health and education.   Medicaid is always the soft target, because God, in the land where social Darwinism, gun and fetus is sacred, does not like welfare recipients.  Little consideration is given to the fact that a vast number of individuals who rely on Medicaid are the elderly and disabled.  The entire analysis, warns Bernanke, is flawed precisely because debt ceilings should not be bargaining instruments to inflict budget cuts.

The whole consequence of such wrangling is, as ever, instilled myopia.  As President Charles Plosser of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia told a gathering of economists in London, those on the hill were simply interested in playing ‘a game of chicken’ over debt limits, ignoring the fundamental fiscal realities that are facing the country (WSJ, Jun 9).

In the short term, however, the economic problems may not be as dire.  A default would only result if principal and interest is not repaid.  Besides, debt is constitutionally sacred in a country fastidious with its credit bingeing.  As the fourteenth amendment to the US constitution notes, ‘The validity of the public debt of the United States? shall not be questioned.’  There is an even an argument to be made that debt ceilings are not merely impairing in discharging US government obligations ? they might well be unconstitutional.  That line of thinking, it seems, has been kept in cold storage.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
Ted Rall
Why Christine Ford vs. Brett Kavanaugh is a Train Wreck You Can’t Look Away From
Lauren Regan
The Day the Valves Turned: Defending the Pipeline Protesters
Ralph Nader
Questions, Questions Where are the Answers?
Binoy Kampmark
Deplatforming Germaine Greer
Raouf Halaby
It Should Not Be A He Said She Said Verdict
Robert Koehler
The Accusation That Wouldn’t Go Away
Jim Hightower
Amazon is Making Workers Tweet About How Great It is to Work There
Robby Sherwin
Rabbi, Rabbi, Where For Art Thou Rabbi?
Vern Loomis
Has Something Evil This Way Come?
Steve Baggarly
Disarm Trident Walk Ends in Georgia
Graham Peebles
Priorities of the Time: Peace
Michael Doliner
The Department of Demonization
David Yearsley
Bollocks to Brexit: the Plumber Sings