Spokane7
65°
July 14, 2011 in Nation/World
Lawmakers snipe, Wall St. frets as deadline nears
WASHINGTON — Testy lawmakers pointed fingers at one another and President Barack Obama on today as negotiations over raising the national debt limited entered a perilous endgame. Wall Street eyed the standoff with growing anxiety, warning of catastrophe if the U.S. defaults on its obligations.
Obama’s blunt declaration that “enough is enough” as Wednesday’s talks ended did nothing to quell the rancor as a new day of positioning and posturing began.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid took to the Senate floor early in the day to snipe that House Republican Leader Eric Cantor shouldn’t even be part of the talks anymore, calling him “childish.” And not long after, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell stood to serve notice that the debt problem belonged squarely in Obama’s lap.
“Republicans will not be reduced to being the tax collectors for the Obama economy,” McConnell said. “Don’t expect any more cover from Republicans on it than you got on health care. None.”
None of it was a promising prelude to negotiations scheduled to resume at the White House on Thursday afternoon, less than three weeks before an Aug. 2 deadline for increasing the government’s borrowing authority.
Obama is demanding that budget negotiators find common ground by week’s end, as the financial world watches with increasing anxiety.
“No one can tell me with certainty that a U.S. default wouldn’t cause catastrophe and wouldn’t severely damage the U.S. or global economy,” Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase & Co., told reporters Thursday. “And it would be irresponsible to take that chance.”
Moody’s Investors Service said Wednesday it will review the government’s credit rating, noting there is a small but rising risk that the government will default on its debt. If Moody’s were to lower the ratings, the consequences would ripple through the economy, pushing up rates for mortgages, car loans and other debts. A Chinese rating agency, Dagong Global Credit Rating Co., also warned of a possible downgrade.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, addressing lawmakers, warned Wednesday that not increasing the nation’s debt ceiling and allowing the nation to default on its debt would send “shock waves through the entire financial system.”
In the cauldron of the White House Cabinet Room, Obama and top lawmakers bargained for nearly two hours Wednesday on spending cuts. Obama curtly ended the session when Cantor, R-Va., urged him to accept a short, monthslong increase in debt instead of one that would last through next year’s presidential election.
“Enough is enough. … I’ll see you all tomorrow,” Obama said, rising from the negotiating table and leaving the room, according to several officials familiar with the session.
Reid said that while other Republican leaders were willing to negotiate in good faith, Cantor “has shown he shouldn’t even be at the table.”
The United States hit its current $14.3 trillion debt ceiling in May and the Obama administration says the government will default on its obligations if the debt limit is not increased by Aug. 2. For a new debt ceiling to last to the end of 2012 would require raising it by about $2.4 trillion.
Republicans, in control of the House of Representatives in part because of the support of tea party activists, say they will not vote to raise the limit if Obama doesn’t agree to at least an equal amount of deficit reductions over 10 years.
Obama and the top eight House and Senate leaders met for the fourth time in as many days Wednesday, and, despite the tense ending, agreed to meet again Thursday. Cantor, speaking to reporters after Wednesday’s meeting broke up, said the White House had been lowering the amount of spending cuts it would put on the table, offering less than $1.4 trillion over 10 years, mostly in domestic and defense spending outside of the major benefits programs Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
The White House argued that the total was closer to $1.7 trillion over 10 years when counting about $240 billion in reduced interest payments from the lowered debt.
Earlier, in comments to a small group of reporters before the White House session, House Speaker John Boehner complained that negotiating with the White House “the last couple months has been like dealing with Jell-O.”
Democratic officials have portrayed the White House as the more flexible party in the negotiations, willing to cut cherished programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, provided Republicans agree to some increases in revenue. Thursday’s meeting was to focus on spending cuts in the two health care programs and on new tax revenue.
With talks reaching a critical stage without real breakthroughs, some Republican and Democratic lawmakers were looking at a plan proposed by McConnell that would give Obama new powers to overcome Republican opposition to raise the debt ceiling.
The proposal would place the burden on Obama to win debt ceiling increases up to three times, provided he was able to override congressional vetoes — a threshold Obama could manage to overcome even without a single Republican vote and without massive spending cuts. Conservatives promptly criticized the plan for giving up the leverage to reduce deficits. But the plan raised the prospect of combining it with some of the spending cuts already identified by the White House in order to win support from conservatives in the House.
In an interview with radio talk-show host Laura Ingraham, McConnell described his plan in stark political terms, warning fellow conservatives that failure to raise the debt limit would probably ensure Obama’s re-election in 2012. He predicted that a default would allow Obama to argue that Republicans were making the economy worse.
“You know, it’s an argument he has a good chance of winning, and all of a sudden we (Republicans) have co-ownership of a bad economy,” McConnell said. “That is a very bad positioning going into an election.”
The proposal won praise from two disparate points in the political spectrum — Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Democratic leader Reid of Nevada.
“I am heartened by what I read,” Reid said. “This is a serious proposal. And I commend the Republican leader for coming forward.”
McConnell’s plan was even winning some consideration in the White House. Democratic officials said that even as Obama confronted Cantor and Boehner in Wednesday’s meeting, he commended McConnell.
“Sen. McConnell at least has put forth a proposal,” a Democratic official quoted the president as saying. “It doesn’t reduce the deficit and that’s what we have to do. It just deals with the debt limit. Now Sen. McConnell wants me to wear the jacket for that.”
The officials said Obama went on to say they all had a responsibility to find a compromise.
© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Stocks plummet as outlook in Europe dims 
leekinny on July 14 at 8:58 a.m.
The teabagger bullied GOP would rather do great damage to the poor, elderly and disabled of our nation than end corporate welfare. That’s wrong and the vast majority of the American people agree. The Repubs would rather do great harm to the US and world economy than make their corporate masters pay their taxes.
Corporate Welfare…
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,989508,00.html
They are not people and they don’t deserve our tax dollars for corporate welfare.
How can you be a Conservative and go along with this nonsense?
idahocity on July 14 at 8:58 a.m.
this is all political theater for the prolls. there will be an increase in the debt ceiling until we collapse. nearly all the politicians are in the bankster’s pocket. they are millionaires with investments tied up in the stock market. you think for a minute they will let the stock market collapse when they have their wealth tied up in it.
leekinny on July 14 at 9:06 a.m.
July 14, 2011 - President Is Best Of The Worst On Economy, U.S. Voters Tell Quinnipiac University National Poll; Voters Blame Bush Over Obama 2-1 For Financial Mess more….
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1624
meadman on July 14 at 9:20 a.m.
leekinny — in addition to your facts, remember that the GOP has said that their primary goal (more important than jobs, the economy, the general good of the country, etc) was to ensure that Obama is only a 1-term president. They don’t give a rats $$@# about the public or anything else. They simply want to destroy whatever they can so they can blame it on Obama. I think the public is catching on……..
ZagChuck on July 14 at 9:34 a.m.
Liberal spending programs approved by both parties are have maxed out our credit cards, and now we are applying for even more credit.
One group (conservatives) wants to reduce spending in an effort to reduce our debt; they’ve asked for a simple one dollar reduction in spending for every dollar the other party wants to raise in taxes.
The other group ( liberals) wants to continue on the path of economic destruction by continuing to overspend our tax dollars.
Fortunately there has been a movement across this country by Conservative independents, Democrats and Republicans, and they are calling for accountability and looking to the leadership in the Republican Party to act as conservatives and stand strong. So far they are doing what they have been elected to do.
greenlibertarian on July 14 at 9:38 a.m.
We know that senior Republicans have said that defeating Obama in 2012 is their sole concern. What’s more important is that’s exactly what they are doing. For ANY pol, it’s watch what they DO, not what they say. In this case, the GOP is consistent, they are DOING as they say they would, destroy Obama’s reelection, NOTHING else matters.
“A Chinese rating agency, Dagong Global Credit Rating Co., also warned of a possible downgrade. ”
Now THAT’S important info. China rules the financial roost these days.
greenlibertarian on July 14 at 9:42 a.m.
“One group (conservatives) wants to reduce spending in an effort to reduce our debt; they’ve asked for a simple one dollar reduction in spending for every dollar the other party wants to raise in taxes.”
Laughable.
Don’t pay much attention, do ya Zagchucky?
The Gang of Five Dems offered FIVE to ONE cuts over revenue increases, and the Gang of Five Republicans QUIT and ran away like the little whiny babies they are.
You should be so proud of your ignorance.
leekinny on July 14 at 9:46 a.m.
@ meadman You are right about that.
@ idahocity I’m inclined to agree with you except for the Tea Party because their out of control teabagger members are insane.
Is the budget a moral document?
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2005/budget_moral.html
lego on July 14 at 9:46 a.m.
Zagchuk get your facts straight. Obama has said he supports a deal in which $4 trillion is cut from spending and $1 trillion is raised in new revenue. Also, the $1 trillion in new revenue proposed is gained through closing tax loopholes and a small raise in taxes on the richest %1 of Americans. You know, the ones enjoying the tax rates that are historically near the lowest they ever been. Republicans refuse to agree to this deal.
I wonder who I’m going to blame when I head to the polls next year?
hawken on July 14 at 10:01 a.m.
Here’s the madness of what Liberals are trying to do:
1- Our current debt is 14.3 Trillion.
2- Obama has “trippled” deficit spending since he took office.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/04/16/obama-triples-deficit-says-republican-plan-is-wrong/
3- Obama has added more to our national debt in his first 19 months than all presidents from Washington through Reagan combined.
http://www.cnsnews.com/node/72404
4- Obama has increased government sending by 25% since he took office.
5- Our total debt to GDP ratio is now worse than the Great Depression.
http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2010/07/21/the-total-us-debt-to-gdp-ratio-is-now-worse-than-in-the-great-depression/
6- Chronic “real,” U6 unemployment, is now at 16.2%
7- Chronic unemployment highest since Great Depression
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/05/eveningnews/main20069136.shtml
The solution of Liberals:
1- Cut spending by a meager 1.4 trillion - Over the next 10 years which is not really actual cuts of $1.4 trillion. Liberals include in their misleading definition of cuts, $240 Billion in interest expense.
2- Raise taxes on job producers increasing chronic unemployment even more.
“Liberal Insanity” is more descriptive than “madness.”
lego on July 14 at 10:30 a.m.
Hawken,
Get real. If you want a breakdown of spending and which presidents created our current deficit:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/06/09/business/economy/20090610-leonhardt-graphic.html
Obama has inherited most of the gloomy deficit picture. He is willing to cut a deal that reduces spending $4 for every $1 of new taxes. This is insanity?
liberal_in_right_wing_land on July 14 at 10:36 a.m.
Hawken, last I checked Obama was not the only person in government. Last I checked he needs to have the republicans work with him to be able to pass bills, but when the republican party has said their only goal is to make sure Obama is a one-term president it becomes very obvious to everyone, but you it seems, that NOTHING WILL GET DONE WHEN ONLY ONE POLITICAL PARTY IS ACTUALLY TRYING TO GET THINGS DONE.
What has the republican controlled house done since they got power to help end this recession? They are the body of government that writes the bills that get passed to the senate that then go to the president to sign. THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT WRITE THE BILLS, THAT IS THE JOB OF THE REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, and they are to busy trying to end abortion, end NPR, defund planned parenthood and make sure the richest of the rich and corporations like Exxon and GE keep getting their tax payer refunds paid by me and you.
Also, Obama actually offered $4 trillion dollars in cuts, but the REPUBLICANS BACKED OUT SAYING THAT WAS TO MUCH.
Finally, these tax cuts on the “job creators” have been in affect for almost 10 years, where are the jobs they have created? Sorry, when over 80% of the country, including a majority of republicans, want taxes raised on the rich, or as you call them the “job creators” that have failed to create any jobs, you know the republican party is more concerned about looking out for the rich than the poor and middle class.
woamike on July 14 at 10:55 a.m.
“Also, Obama actually offered $4 trillion dollars in cuts, but the REPUBLICANS BACKED OUT SAYING THAT WAS TO MUCH.”
Not quite - 2 trillion in cuts (nearly all in the out years) and 2 trillion in tax increases NOW. R’s said NO to tax increases - not to spending cuts. He KNEW the R’s wouldn’t go for that deal.
BHO’s “plan” is ala Wimpy from Popeye: “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today”.
BHO does not want to cut a plug nickle and you guys know it.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on July 14 at 11:11 a.m.
again, woamike, that still comes up to $4 trillion dollars. Just because the tea baggers and republicans don’t like it doesn’t mean it has been proposed and doesn’t mean it doesn’t equal $4 trillion. Also, but I am sure you already know this since you seem to know everything about government, Obama is not proposing one cent of new taxes or any tax increases. Obama is talking about ending tax breaks that had an expiration date on them to begin with and to return the tax levels back to where they were before these breaks were given out. There is a difference between RAISING taxes and just ending tax BREAKS AND LOOPHOLES.
Its such simple minded thinking if you think we can end this recession simply by cutting everything, even Reagan knew you couldn’t just cut everything and he raised taxes - even though the tea baggers try and say he didn’t.
What happened when Reagan raised taxes? Jobs were created. What happened when Clinton raised taxes? 23 million jobs were created. What happened when Bush handed out huge unpaid tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires? Jobs were lost and we were plummeted deeper into a recession, but these rich people saw their wealth skyrocket to levels never seen before on this planet.
Such idiots who think that you can balance the budget by cutting from the poor, elderly and middle class, meanwhile giving tax breaks to the rich and giant corporations.
Ed Byrnes on July 14 at 11:54 a.m.
What is deeply troubling is that we as a country are in a big mess moving rapidly toward a crisis state and yet our leaders, and far too many of their followers, remain engaged in partisan posturing.
Ed
Traveler on July 14 at 12:00 p.m.
lego,
That NYT graphic was simple to understand and refreshingly apolitical. Any wonder Mr. Diarrhea didn’t respond to it?
liberal,
“Obama is not proposing one cent of new taxes or any tax increases. Obama is talking about ending tax breaks that had an expiration date on them to begin with and to return the tax levels back to where they were before these breaks were given out.”
Again, their lack of response to this most obvious — and central — fact is unsurprising.
ZagChuck on July 14 at 12:18 p.m.
Obama might have said $4 Trillion, but when he got to the negotiating table, the dems could only identify $1.5 Trillion in cuts, but he still wanted over $2 Trillion in new taxes…. That wasn’t the deal. Now Obama is complaining and the cheerleaders (formerly known as journalists) have the left fired up with mis-information.( again)
The problem with libs is they believe Obama when he talks, but don’t believe facts when they are presented.
Liberals have a serious addiction to tax payer money. They have used the addiction to buy off voters for centuries and are very afraid of losing the taxpayer cashcow they’ve been using to build their base.
Facts and liberals are never on the same side of any discussion.
mtharves on July 14 at 12:19 p.m.
How about seriously looking at those subsidies. Here’s an article from NY Times that talks about 1.5 trillion possible savings over 5 years. Let’s have a “pork” barbecue!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/us/politics/15spend.html?_r=1&hp
Dazzeetrader11 on July 14 at 12:31 p.m.
My friend Hawken says:
1- Our current debt is 14.3 Trillion< today it’s $14.485…..going up too.
I never correct my friends…consider this additive news. Who couldn’t love Hawken??? Such an informed good man.
johnclarke on July 14 at 12:55 p.m.
Lego, thanks for the NY times article. Unfortunately, even pictures are too hard for the Hawkens and Daisys of the world to accept. Yup, facts and data just don’t seem to be the right language for some people.
Gee, I wonder if they understand that Bush simply didn’t account for the war costs (the first unfunded wars in history) and President Obama cast the light of day on this deception?
Daisy, I think Hawken is quite possibly the least informed person on the planet. You are plain nuts, and that’s cool. He just makes up stuff. See, this is how the Cons operate. Facts and data ? Nonsense - it’s Obama’s fault !
johnclarke on July 14 at 1:09 p.m.
“Liberals have a serious addiction to tax payer money. They have used the addiction to buy off voters for centuries and are very afraid of losing the taxpayer cashcow they’ve been using to build their base.
Facts and liberals are never on the same side of any discussion”
Hey zagchuck, if you can step in from opposite world for a second and take at look at lego’s NY Times chart? I think you need to substitute “republicans” for “liberals” in your statement.
woamike on July 14 at 1:12 p.m.
“again, woamike, that still comes up to $4 trillion dollars. Just because the tea baggers and republicans don’t like it doesn’t mean it has been proposed and doesn’t mean it doesn’t equal $4 trillion.”
Hey lib,
You said 4 trillion in (spending) cuts. Now you back peddle and spin, once again proving you’re full of it. As Zagchuck points out, the the 2 trillion in “cuts” was a lot of smoke and mirrors. Making “cuts” in distant out-year budgets is the pol’s way of talking tough, but putting the real work/pain off until they’re either out of office or re-elected. Out-year “cuts” are seldom followed through with.
Again BHO’s plan is that of Wimpy in Popeye: “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today”.
BTW, aren’t you the pot calling the kettle black by calling other people “tea-baggers”?
Dazzeetrader11 on July 14 at 1:24 p.m.
Obama NEEDS to put this to bed for one simple reason: Elections.
He wants and demands a LONG term plan so the deficit and budget don’t come up again till after his election. Pubs want shorter term things so it DOES come up again time and time again BEFORE the elections.
Do the blues really want to contain spending? Of course not.
So do the blues want the spending to stop? NO. Why? .because the people that support the blues being elected will vote for the blues. SImple concept really. It’s the handout crew that wants more money….for themselves. Reds will do that for the blues and reds by cutting taxes……all taxes.
The reds want to have something to pursue and want to reopen this longstanding wound. The wound MUST be closed.
When and how.??? I don’t know but it must be done. Well, actually I do know but business calls. Read this again and again. It’s the gist of things. Strategy and tactics…..
johnclarke on July 14 at 1:27 p.m.
hey con;
I like the BHO plan of addressing the problem like an adult instead of just creating it and then blaming everyone else.
Seriously, trying to actually increase revenues and spreading the cuts out over a longer timeframe is what we call “managing” the problem. Running around like idiot and screaming CUTS and threatening to not raise the debt ceiling is simply moronic. Yes, I used a name. The republicans, and in particular their leadership are a group of morons.
DickAdams on July 14 at 1:51 p.m.
Its only the teabaggers, the republicans, and Geo W Bush`s fault for the mess we are in today.
If you actually believe that, your either a fool (except for the truly needy) or in the public trough licking it clean and need more to fill it up again so you get your freebies and sit on you a$$, using your food stamps for the kind of stuff that makes you fat and lazy. I should include to the list of fools, those who are obsessed with their hatred and believe its only one party`s fault. Both sides of the isle have their share of career politicians that need the boot. Term limits may be the solution. And put guys like Charlie Rangle and other republicans like him in the slammer where they belong. Tax evaders like our Secretary of the Treasury too.
gb333 on July 14 at 1:52 p.m.
Hawkin, everything you said is true, but take it in to context please.
When Obama took office, he inherited the Bush tax cuts, and 2 wars.(BTW Bush doubled the deficit during his time).
This right here was a huge cause of our ever increasing debt and deficit.
Now, what else else happened? Oh yeah the recession. He got that too. So now not only did Obama still have to pay for the two wars, and the Tax cuts, but far less revenue was coming in.
Now Obama did increase spending, but most of that was to try and stimulate the economy. Which I believe most economists think is a good thing, and many are even saying not enough was spent.
So yes, everything you wrote is true, but the context of your claims is way off.
detroitdude on July 14 at 1:57 p.m.
Dazzee said: “He wants and demands a LONG term plan so the deficit and budget don’t come up again till after his election. Pubs want shorter term things so it DOES come up again time and time again BEFORE the elections.”
Yes, that is called being a leader. Why would they want it to come up again and again (your words)? Because this isn’t about what is best for America in the long term, this is politicking. This is being selfish. If the GOP hates the debt as much as they claim, WHY would they be against a long term fiscal solution?
“It’s the handout crew that wants more money….for themselves.”
Exactly, big business and CEO’s making $24,000 an HOUR want the continued handouts. You seem to think that just because someone votes for a progressive candidate that they are part of gmorton’s “free lunch” crowd, that is not the case.
johnclarke on July 14 at 1:57 p.m.
Great post Dick. I don’t blame just one party, I mostly blame one party because it was their fault. It has nothing to do with “free lunches” or “libs” or “bigfoot”. The majority of the debt problem comes from Mr. George W Bush. In fact, even if you count the wars as half Obama’s then the Bush spending literally dwarfs the Obama spending. I’m sorry Dick, but them be the facts. There is a helpful picture posted up there by Lego.
Way to bring up Charlie Rangle, who apparently is the only crooked politician around, right.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on July 14 at 2:11 p.m.
woamike, I am not backpedaling from anything. What I said was correct, but what i should have said was that he was offering $4 trillion in cuts and ending tax breaks and tax loopholes for the rich and giant corporations.
Now listen to me closely on this ZagChuck, woamike, ditzy dasiy, and hawken……OBAMA IS NOT PROPOSING ONE CENT IN NEW TAXES. HE IS TALKING ABOUT ENDING TAX BREAKS AND TAX LOOPHOLES. There is a difference between raising taxes and just ending tax breaks that were never meant to be permanent when they were written by the republicans and Bush. If you cannot understand that then you continue to sure your own stupidity on this issue.
Also, will one of you tea bagging conservatives on here that keep bashing Obama and the democrats plan please explain the plan the republicans have brought forth? Oh yeah, they haven’t brought one.
One more thing, please explain to me why Cantor, Boehner and McConnell have voted a combined 19 times to raise the debt ceiling since they have been elected to to office with NO strings or deal attached under Clinton and Bush, but once Obama becomes president they are trying to push a bunch of spending cuts that hurt the poor, middle class and elderly (all groups with little to no lobbyists to fight for them) while protecting their rich political base before they bring this to a vote? Please explain me this?
Also, woamikey, tea bagger is a term YOUR stupid “movement” gave themselves. It was only once that your stupid tea party leaders realized what it meant that they tried to backpedal from it. Sorry, I am just calling your stupid little tea party what they called themselves. Don’t like it, then I guess you can continue to backpedal from it like you do everything else.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on July 14 at 2:15 p.m.
Dick, I think every single democrat or liberal poster on here has called out their own party. I have called out and voiced my displeasure with them many times. I know johnclark has, misjustice has, detriotdude has……its not our fault you guys cannot read.
I think its your narrow minded conservatives on here who think the republican party has never done anything wrong in the history of this country and are the only one fighting for America.
Dazzeetrader11 on July 14 at 2:16 p.m.
Kind of funny…it seem we all want the same thing. No problem here fellas. How we get the job done is up to those guys in DC. Send letters! I’m with all of ya. Just don’t steal my money….or my stuff;)
johnclarke on July 14 at 2:22 p.m.
Thank you liberal.
“The program’s biggest champion has been Representative Sanford D. Bishop Jr., Democrat of Georgia, whose district has many of the state’s nearly 3,000 peanut farmers. Mr. Bishop, a member of the Appropriations Committee, has for five years blocked efforts to cut the program, taking to the floor last month to denounce amendments to eliminate the credits. ”
From the mtharves post above. This Democrat needs to be removed from office, effective immediately. It is infuriating that one guy can block ending this farmer welfare. If peanut farming is not competitive, the free market should take over and they should grow something else. Bad Democrat
Hiker on July 14 at 3:33 p.m.
House Republicans are walking their party off a cliff. For what?
When all heck breaks loose on Aug. 3 (and it will), Obama will be able to say he repeatedly warned everyone. Nothing that Republicans say will make a bit of difference. The party will lose the House in a landslide in 2012.
Yes, we need to cut spending and increase revenue. But even if Republicans, Democrats, and the WH made a deal today, it seems doubtful that there’s enough time to write the legislation, let the CBO score it, and bring it to the floor in both houses for a vote.
Just raise the debt limit now.
Patanjali on July 14 at 3:35 p.m.
The Constitution of the United States, Amendment XIV, Section 4 provides that “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law,…shall not be questioned.” While this sentence has never, to my knowledge, been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, it seems clear that it means that the current debt that the U. S. has incurred, which has all been authorized by law, CANNOT be defaulted. It must be paid, even if this means incurring more debt to do so.
mtharves on July 14 at 3:38 p.m.
JC,
I totally agree that this Dem should go and any other politicians who support such subsidies, Dem or Rep.
hawken on July 14 at 4:44 p.m.
Default is the misinformation and scare tactic of the left.
Just like Social Security recipients won’t get their checks. Which is a despicable scare tactic on the part of Obama to manipulate the elderly.
We have plenty of current revenues and cash flow to pay our interest expense, Social Security, Medicare, the Military and more.
Our current revenue, which is 60% of what we spend is more than enough cash flow to avoid default.
From there, Obama will have to set priorities. Which we desperately need.
No doubt that failing to raise the debt limit will be painful.
However, it will not be nearly as painful as continuing to borrow, tax and spend our way into the Greater Great Depression and hyper-inflation.
Our whole system needs to be “re-set.” Now is the time. To push it out and put it upon our children is greedy, immoral and criminal.
The easiest solution is for liberals to accept a $4 trillion cut in our spending, without raising taxes, which will cause unemployment to go higher than the current, U6, 16.2%.
SMARTGUY on July 14 at 5:08 p.m.
I absolutely agree with Hawken, raising taxes on the job producers will cause greater unemployment.
(in China)
johnclarke on July 14 at 6:17 p.m.
All the Cons freaked out on Clinton when he raised taxes, and the economy grew like crazy. The Bush tax cuts resulted in the slowest growth decade since WW2. Gee, I guess we need more evidence or something.
misjustice on July 14 at 7:52 p.m.
Lawmakers snipe, Wallstreet frets, and Voters blame - BUSH!
“Voters are increasingly displeased with President Obama’s handling of the economy, but a new poll finds most Americans still think George W. Bush is responsible for the nation’s dismal financial state.
According to a new Quinnipiac poll, 54 percent of those surveyed say Bush is responsible for the “current condition” of the economy, compared to just 27 percent who blame Obama. Among self-described independent voters, a key 2012 voting bloc, the number shifts slightly: 49 percent point the finger at the former GOP president, while 24 percent blame Obama.”
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/voters-blame-bush-more-obama-economy-143014602.html
greenlibertarian on July 14 at 8:58 p.m.
There are still (barely) some sane Conservatives out there, with which I share many beliefs.
Then there are the mad dog crazy teabaggers that show up on this site. They think government is pure evil. Some think government spending as a percent of GDP should and even posit that it must, return to a level of 80 years ago, or more. That will never happen absence an enormous global depression the scale of which will make the Great Depression seem like happy times. It’s slightly possible, but not likely that if the US defaults on the debt it will trigger such a cataclysm.
Western economies the world over all highly leveraged, but some are doing well, such as Germany which through extremely hard work and cooperation between business, labor, and government, have a sound economy with a very positive outlook.
As to elections, they are decided by the true independents that actually due switch, not more than 8-10% of the electorate. At least half of them will literally flip a coin when they vote. Consumer AND business confidence are key factors in economic growth. The truth of the matter is, we’ll be lucky to maintain have the “normal” (past 50 years) post recessionary growth in GDP.
The world is a very different place, even since the last recession in the early 2000’s.
Considering the rancor and outright foolishness exhibited on both sides of the aisle, the challenge is immense.
greenlibertarian on July 14 at 9:06 p.m.
Oh, and don’t trust anybody’s macro budget numbers, cuts or revenue increases planned to occur over 5 years out. Crystal balls would likely be just as accurate,