One reads a lot about the current battle about whether Congress should or 
shouldn't be able to raise the US government's debt ceiling.  Most of what one 
reads in the American press concerns the infighting between the GOP leadership 
and the Obama administration.  One of the best articles explaining what is 
really at issue is in today's Globe & Mail.  Here it is:

Debt-ceiling deniers court economic disaster
 

KONRAD YAKABUSKI | Columnist profile | E-mail

WASHINGTON- From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jul. 08, 2011 9:56PM EDT
Last updated Sunday, Jul. 10, 2011 11:09AM EDT
 

You would think a bone-chillingly bad jobs report would persuade some American 
politicians that it is their patriotic duty to end the uncertainty about 
whether the U.S. government will be able to pay its bills next month.

News that the United States created a negligible 18,000 new jobs in June - or 
one-third fewer than Canada, whose economy is 10 times smaller - should be 
proof enough that the time has come to reassure U.S. bondholders, pensioners 
and soldiers alike that their cheques will arrive in August.

With the unemployment rate rising to 9.2 per cent last month, American consumer 
confidence is fragile enough without the threat of a potential debt default by 
the U.S. government to add to the gloom.

Yet, there was Michele Bachmann, repeating on Friday her refusal to vote to 
increase the statutory limit on the amount the U.S. Treasury can borrow once it 
hits the current $14.3-trillion (U.S.) ceiling on Aug. 2.

For Ms. Bachmann and a strikingly large corps of like-minded Tea Partiers in 
Congress, there is no need to pass legislation to raise the limit, even though 
the government now borrows 44 cents of every dollar it spends.

"It's absolutely absurd to think the United States would have to default on its 
debt," Ms. Bachmann, the Minnesota congresswoman and Republican presidential 
candidate, told Fox News. "We have [tax] revenues consistently coming into the 
government."

Ms. Bachmann, and a crowd of debt-ceiling deniers that includes Sarah Palin and 
Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey, insist the U.S. government could just 
"prioritize" spending if it runs out of room to borrow.

Paying the interest on the federal debt would come first, after which Social 
Security pensions, Medicare payments and military salaries would follow. "After 
that, we would have to have some very tough love," Ms. Bachmann said. "We can't 
spend money on everything politicians want."

Politicians of Ms. Bachmann's ilk have persuaded a huge swath of the American 
population that raising the debt ceiling is a bad thing. Scores of otherwise 
sensible Republicans in Congress are now reluctant to agree to raise the 
borrowing limit out of fear of a grassroots revolt.

Yet, unless you prefer courting economic disaster, raising the debt limit 
should not be an option.

"The Aug. 2 deadline is a real deadline," Jay Powell, a former Treasury 
Department undersecretary under George H.W. Bush, explained in an interview. 
"The federal government will run short of funds on Aug. 2 and on Aug. 3 be 
unable to pay its bills going forward."

An analysis by Mr. Powell, a visiting scholar at the Washington-based 
Bipartisan Policy Center, shows that the U.S. government is projected to take 
in $172-billion in revenues between Aug. 3 and Aug. 31, but face bills 
totalling $306-billion.

The shortfall of $134-billion would not only force the government to choose 
whom to pay among its millions of debt holders, pension recipients and 
employees. The sudden plunge in federal spending - equivalent to a staggering 
10 per cent of U.S. gross domestic product in August - would by all accounts 
pull the rug out from under the economy.

"The bad job numbers underscore the need to avoid that kind of negative shock 
to the economy," Mr. Powell added.

Republican House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, commenting on the 
pathetic June jobs report, appeared to agree: "While some think that we can go 
past Aug. 2, I frankly think it puts us in an awful lot of jeopardy and puts 
our economy in jeopardy, risking even more jobs."

But Mr. Boehner has painted himself into a corner. He has made raising the debt 
ceiling conditional on reaching a long-term deficit-reduction deal with the 
White House equivalent in size to any increase in the borrowing limit.

But as congressional leaders prepared for a Sunday meeting with President 
Barack Obama, Mr. Boehner conceded that no such deal is in sight: "This is a 
Rubik's cube that we have not worked out yet."

Even if they do work it out, Mr. Boehner will have a tough time persuading 
scores of his fellow 239 GOP House members to vote for it.

About three dozen of them, along with 12 Republican senators, have taken a 
"Cut, Cap, Balance" pledge. Their support for a debt-ceiling hike is contingent 
on passage of an "immediate" spending cut, a statutory cap on future spending 
and a constitutional amendment requiring the federal government to balance its 
budget every year. All that by Aug. 2.

Then again, if Ms. Bachmann is right, why worry about the debt ceiling at all?

"What would happen [without an increase in the borrowing limit] is that we 
would see a reduction in government jobs, but we would see a rise in 
private-sector jobs," she told CNBC on Friday.

Ms. Bachmann is entitled to her opinion. But to be safe, it's probably better 
if we never have to test her theory.

 
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to