Lisa Mascaro
 |
| Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid speaks to the media after meeting with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, right, about the debt limit. |
Raising the debt limit is not necessary. Congress has the right to revoke the Federal Reserve's charter - at any time.
Call or email your local congressman and ask them,
"Why does the government insist on borrowing money from outside banks when Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution allows the government to simply print its own money?"
Contact the Whitehouse:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
Contact Congress:
http://weeklyintercept.blogspot.com/p/complete-contact-list-for-us-congress_15.html
WASHINGTON — A plan by the Senate's two top leaders to allow President Obama to raise the debt limit without congressional approval is emerging as the most likely strategy to avoid a looming federal default.
The plan being drafted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada would lock in roughly $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction over the next ten years — a figure considerably smaller than Republican leaders or President Obama had been seeking.
Administration officials have said they still would prefer a more sweeping deal on the deficit, but they signaled the idea would be acceptable to Obama.
Conservatives, particularly in the House, seem likely to oppose it. But with efforts to deliver a larger deficit-reduction deal still stalemated, the new plan, which builds on a proposal put forward earlier in the week by McConnell, could provide a way out of a dead end that has become politically and economically perilous.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) indicated such "last-ditch" efforts may become more palatable in the time ahead.
"What may look like something less than optimal today, if we're unable to get to an agreement, might look pretty good," Boehner said.
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), the House majority leader, toned his hard-line stance Thursday, saying, "There is a dose of pragmatism in all that we do."
The plan came as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner warned that time for debate was running out. The nation's bond-rating, and with it the financial stability of the nation, hinge on the ability of Congress and the White House to approve more borrowing before the government begins running out of cash on Aug. 2, he said.
"We're running out of time," Geithner told reporters after a private lunch meeting with Senate Democrats.
Underscoring Geithner's warning, the government of China, which is one of the largest holders of U.S. debt, issued a statement urging American officials to act "responsibly."
Congressional leaders met at the White House for a fifth straight day Thursday. There were no plans for a session on Friday, but Obama gave congressional leaders 24 to 36 hours to evaluate options, and planned a news conference Friday morning. The president said he and his staff were available and willing to meet over the weekend.
"It's decision time," Obama told those meeting at the White House, according to a Democratic official familiar with the session and who would describe it only condition of anonymity. "We need concrete plans to move this forward," the president said.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who was criticized after confronting Obama during a meeting Wednesday, was more restrained at Thursday's talks. The Democratic official said the meeting was "cordial."
There was little discussion of the proposal being cobbled together by the Senate leaders, which is seen as a "fallback option."
"The president appreciates Senators Reid and McConnell [for] trying to solve the immediate problem," the official said. "It's important that everyone in the room agreed that default is not an option. However, this remains a fallback option.
Under the emerging proposal, Obama would be able to order increases in the debt ceiling on his own, without congressional approval.
Congress would vote on legislation to block an increase, but if such a resolution passed, as is likely, Obama would veto it. If the veto was sustained by Congress, the debt limit would be increased.
Republican strategists feel that scenario would force Obama to take full political responsibility for the rising national debt, a prospect that White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama could live with.
"The president is willing to take responsibility for leading, and he is willing to do what it takes to compromise to reach something significant, and he is willing to own it, if other people won't," Carney said. "We have to raise the debt ceiling, because the United States is the United States and it does not default on its obligations."
Thursday's developments came as a new poll showed that voters would be more likely to blame Republicans than Democrats if a failure to increase the debt limit led to a default on federal obligations. The same survey, by Quinnipiac University in Connecticut, found that by a 2-1 margin, voters still blame former President Bush over Obama for the state of the economy.
The Senate proposal, however, falls far short of the demands being made by conservative Republicans in the House, where its chances for success are unclear.
Republicans have insisted on at least a dollar-for-dollar swap of spending cuts to approve an increase in the country's borrowing limit. That would mean about $2.4 trillion in spending cuts would be needed to cover the increase in borrowing authority Treasury officials estimate is required through next year.
McConnell's initial offer was roundly criticized by conservatives because it failed to lock in the spending reductions. Under the new proposal being shaped, a specific level of cuts would be locked in as part of the deal, according to congressional aides.
What remained uncertain in the proposal that was emerging was whether Congress would vote more than once, as the GOP prefers, forcing Obama to request multiple debt ceiling increases well into the 2012 election year.
In Thursday's talks, Obama reiterated his preference for a long-term resolution. "A short-term solution is not something I will sign," he told those at the table, according to the Democratic official.
The proposal also could include formation of a bipartisan congressional commission to recommend future budget reforms, including possible changes to entitlement programs or tax policy, that would be subject to an up-or-down vote in both chambers.
GOP aides cautioned that several alternative scenarios were being floated as leaders struggle to find enough votes to pass a bill.
Congressional aides said that unless talks between the White House and congressional leaders suddenly yield an unexpected deal in coming days, Reid and McConnell would bring their proposal to the Senate floor, possibly as soon as next week.
Proponents hope that passage by the Senate, combined with lobbying by business groups, would create sufficient pressure for House passage.
"We don't have it worked out yet, but it's something that we're looking to," said Reid, who has been working on the scenario with the Republican leader for the past several days.
Posts
They're only going to borrow $13.5 trillion over the next ten years instead of $15 trillion. Wow, that should make a big difference.
ReplyDeleteWell then I quess today's my lucky day!
ReplyDeleteDuring the last Presidential election, CSpan2 Book TV aired a program where the author discussed the results of his or her research, which suggested that something like 5-10% of Democrats , and 5-10% of Republicans, essentially debated and defined the ideological constructs of each party. The point was that the vast, vast, vast majority of the citizens of this country have their lives dictated by the most active and vocal members of society, who also happen to be more privileged .
ReplyDeleteI strongly suspect that the same thing is occurring with the debt ceiling debate. The debate is not really about the debt ceiling per se, but rather a very deep, long-standing debate about the role and size of government. It’s never been resolved, and never will be resolved in our representative democracy. However, in the mean time, the regular folks in our society run the risk of being irreparably damaged. The elites (the upper and upper middle socio-economic classes) on each side of the fence have theirs, their corporate contributions, decent jobs and income, and will fare just fine economically. It’s the ordinary citizens (lower middle socio-economic class) who will most likely get screwed, no matter which side ultimately prevails in the short term.