Trying to make sense of the McConnell debt-ceiling plan
Sly as a fox or sneaky as a weasel? Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has offered a contingency plan for a debt-ceiling increase that is being viewed both warily and cheerfully on the right — and with shock, but early seeming delight, in some precincts of the left.
Let’s try to figure out what’s going on.
Rich Lowry at National Review Online seems to have the most details about what the McConnell plan would entail. It is a backward legislation process by which the president gets what he wants, even if neither chamber can muster a majority vote in favor of what the president wants, unless a super-majority (two-thirds) of both chambers votes to override the president’s veto of the disapproval of his plan. And this process would play out three times during the next 12 months, with the president making three separate requests in the amounts of $700 billion, $900 billion and $900 billion.
Confused yet?
The plan is being called an automatic debt-ceiling increase for President Obama, which isn’t technically true — but it is true for all intents and purposes, because veto overrides are fairly rare things.
There are two apparent catches where Obama is concerned. First, he can only get a $100 million increase before Congress votes. And those votes require him to submit a plan for cutting spending — there’s no mention of raising taxes — by an amount equal to each total request. That means a total of $2.5 trillion in cuts if he’s to get all three requests.
Second, by giving the impression that a debt-ceiling increase is there for Obama’s taking if further negotiations break down, McConnell is trying to kill the arguments that congressional Republicans are blocking a deal and risking a (technical) default of the federal government.
Yet, at first glance, I have strong reservations about each point.
On the first point: There is nothing in the McConnell plan, as far as I can tell right now, to allow Congress to direct where the spending cuts go (other than the potential, but highly unlikely, veto override). As far as I can tell, Obama could simply say he’s going to cut the defense budget by $2.5 trillion over the next 10 years — which Republicans and, I suspect, even a lot of Democrats would find objectionable — and Congress would be virtually powerless to stop him. (To my friends on the left: Try to keep in mind that in future years, this arrangement could set a precedent for cutting Obamacare, Medicaid, welfare, etc. in the same way.)
Worse, there does not appear to be much of an enforcement mechanism for making sure the cuts actually happen. Congress would have to incorporate them in future appropriations bills. But what if, for instance, Senate Democrats filibustered those appropriations bills until the cuts were removed. Or, worse, what if Obama went back on his word and vetoed the appropriations bills, negating the cuts he promised to make? Those scenarios may or may not be likely, but in this kind of situation I think it’s worth examining such possibilities.
And still worse, this arrangement would seem to have the same problem that congressional Republicans have complained about regarding the cuts Obama already has proposed: That they’re back-loaded in a way that keeps deficits large now and makes future cuts less likely to actually be made.
In other words, this does not seem likely to produce good fiscal policy.
Now, on the second point: This may or may not be good politics — it’s not obviously good politics, imo — but it strikes me as too clever by half and too cynical by full. I think it could easily be seen, and rightly so, as an abdication of duty.
Let the House pass a debt-ceiling measure, and let McConnell attempt to bring it to the Senate floor. Or, let them say that they’ll approve a debt-ceiling increase if the Senate will approve and Obama will sign the Ryan budget plan for 2012. And if Senate Democrats won’t take up either measure and won’t propose an alternative, we’ll know who stood in the way.
The GOP doesn’t need to resort to this kind of gimmickry. Or can someone convince me that this is actually a good idea?
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
185 comments Add your comment
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
8:48 pm
It seems if cutting taxes actually generated revenue the opposite would be true.
——————-
I’m only proving that what someone said earlier was a lie or based in ignorance of the facts. Bush lowered rates and revenue went up.
Deal with it.
Linda
July 12th, 2011
8:49 pm
My president is black@8:34, You must mean Herman Cain. He’s all black, you know.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
8:49 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
8:45 pm
Why am I one of the few people on this blog that cites sites to back up my comments?
Why am I one of the few people on this blog that cites govt. websites to back up my comments?
Why do Democrats argue with facts from historical govt. websites?
+++++
Tax revenue under Clinton went up 86% while under Bush they went up only 25%.
OMB historical tables.
Allen
July 12th, 2011
8:52 pm
The Republicans have proven the only thing they are good at is politicking . . . they absolutely cannot govern . . . and they could care less about the average American. Neither are they fiscally conservative as they would lead everyone to believe. Historically, it has always taken a Democratic administration to straighten out the mess Republicans make.
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
8:56 pm
Incorrect. Our President Bush had to fix the fallout from Clinton’s internet bubble collapse, recession, and al Qaeda plot in progress, and the Democrats failed parasite mortgage programs.
Linda
July 12th, 2011
8:57 pm
Moderate@8:49, Spin, spin, spin. I’ve already posted the tables of revenues, spending & deficits. I’ve already posted the unemployment numbers. These were all from govt. websites.
What are you trying to spin now?
Allen
July 12th, 2011
9:00 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout – Clinton left Bush a surplus . . . Bush spent that and then ran up the biggest deficit in our history to-date. You Repubs ran our economy in the ditch . . . and now you are complaining about the size of the tow truck to get us out.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:02 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
8:57 pm
Moderate@8:49, Spin, spin, spin. I’ve already posted the tables of revenues, spending & deficits. I’ve already posted the unemployment numbers. These were all from govt. websites.
What are you trying to spin now?
++++
I presented facts and you try to dismiss them as spin. The fact is under Clinton tax revenues went up 86% under Bush only 25%.
If someone presents facts that you don’t like you call it spin.
Red dude
July 12th, 2011
9:02 pm
LBB @8:56
Again, please don’t show your ignorance and provide the libs with amo…..al Qaeda struck on Bush’s watch! We should be happy that libs haven’t held that against Bush!
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:03 pm
Allen@8:52, Pray tell how the Republicans made this “mess.” Wasn’t it instigated by Democrat lawmakers in the ’90s by declaring that home ownership was a right, not a privilege, & that people who had no job/income, bad/no credit & no money were entitled to own a home?
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:04 pm
Surplus? Incorrect. Clinton increased the national debt every year.
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:05 pm
Clinton did nothing for eight years while al Qaeda attacked us repeatedly and planned and trained for 9/11. Clinton could have taken OBL from the Sudan when they offered him to us. Clinton decided to let OBL go free.
Clinton: Do-nothing coward on Islamofascist terrorism.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:08 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:04 pm
Surplus? Incorrect. Clinton increased the national debt every year.
+++
The OMB tables would seem to disagree with you.
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:09 pm
The national debt tables would not.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:09 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:05 pm
Clinton did nothing for eight years while al Qaeda attacked us repeatedly and planned and trained for 9/11. Clinton could have taken OBL from the Sudan when they offered him to us. Clinton decided to let OBL go free.
Clinton: Do-nothing coward on Islamofascist terrorism.
+++++
I thought we were talking about taxes.
Under which president have more Americans died from terrorist attacks?
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:12 pm
Allen@ 9:00, Where can you document that Clinton left a surplus? How much was it? Where is it? The facts from the Treasury Dept. indicate that his adm. also added to the debt every year that he was in office.
Bush did not run up the biggest deficit in our history to date. His adm. added $4.351 T to the natl. debt in 8 yrs. Obama’s adm. has added $4.5 T in 20 mts.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:12 pm
Who permitted OBL to plot, train for, and deploy his Islamofascist terrorists to the US?
Clinton cowardly did nothing to respond to the African embassy bombings, USS Cole bombing, or Khobar Towers. Clinton declined to take custody of OBL from the Sudan.
The 9/11 victims’ blood is on Clintons hands only.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:14 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:03 pm
Allen@8:52, Pray tell how the Republicans made this “mess.” Wasn’t it instigated by Democrat lawmakers in the ’90s by declaring that home ownership was a right, not a privilege, & that people who had no job/income, bad/no credit & no money were entitled to own a home?
++++++
Well, why didn’t the Republicans change all that since they had a majority in the Senate from 1995 to 2001. They controlled the house from 1995 to 2007.
I can’t see how Bush and the Republicans were able to pass these tax cuts but were unable to change the lending laws.
Allen
July 12th, 2011
9:16 pm
You right-wingers on here seem to believe everything those misleading, anti-Obama corporate paid for TV commercials claim. They are only trying to protect the wealthiest 1 to 2% of Americans. If you really want fiscal responsiblity, let’s not forget that Obama voted against Bush’s unjust war in Iraq — one predicated on Bush and Cheney lies about WMD’s . . . that ongoing debacle is what primarily got us into this financial mess.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:16 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:12 pm
Allen@ 9:00, Where can you document that Clinton left a surplus? How much was it? Where is it? The facts from the Treasury Dept. indicate that his adm. also added to the debt every year that he was in office.
Bush did not run up the biggest deficit in our history to date. His adm. added $4.351 T to the natl. debt in 8 yrs. Obama’s adm. has added $4.5 T in 20 mts.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
++++
OMB website table 1.1.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:17 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:12 pm
Who permitted OBL to plot, train for, and deploy his Islamofascist terrorists to the US?
Clinton cowardly did nothing to respond to the African embassy bombings, USS Cole bombing, or Khobar Towers. Clinton declined to take custody of OBL from the Sudan.
The 9/11 victims’ blood is on Clintons hands only.
+++
Who allowed them to board an airplane.
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Clinton. How do you think they got here?
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Moderate@9:02, Again, I made comments & backed them up with govt. websites. You made comments & did not back them with tomatoes or radishes.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Clinton. How do you think they got here?
+++
They were on those planes for a year. lol
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:19 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Moderate@9:02, Again, I made comments & backed them up with govt. websites. You made comments & did not back them with tomatoes or radishes.
++
I did OMB website.
yuzeyurbrane
July 12th, 2011
9:19 pm
Get real Kyle. The problem with the passage of a clean bill lies with the Republicans’ decision to engage in the extortion busn. rather than the use of normal legis. process like hearings, votes, etc. If they decide to agree to a clean bill, like all Presidents, Repub. and Dem., have gotten in the past then it will happen. But the public already resents the financial bind the Repubs have put us in. Who in their right mind would want to play politics with honoring our country’s debts? As Repub. columnist David Brooks noted, the GOP has lost its right to govern and will be treated as the fringe group it has become until it cleans its own house of its own extremists.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:20 pm
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:19 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Moderate@9:02, Again, I made comments & backed them up with govt. websites. You made comments & did not back them with tomatoes or radishes.
++
I did OMB website.
+++
That’s why they put the .gov at the end of it. lol
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:20 pm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:21 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Moderate@9:02, Again, I made comments & backed them up with govt. websites. You made comments & did not back them with tomatoes or radishes.
++++
All my date comes from the OMB historical tables.
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:23 pm
yuzeyurbrane: The problem with the passage of a clean bill lies with the Democrat party’s desire to keep up their obscene, un-American spending spree.
——————————–
Fixed at no charge.
Allen
July 12th, 2011
9:27 pm
@ yuzeyurbrane – Amen, brother.
what??
July 12th, 2011
9:33 pm
Linda-
I am assuming that website composes a yearly average.
So basically what you have proved was the Clinton enjoyed lower unemployment with higher taxes than Bush did with lower taxes. (5.205 to 5.26). You are literally arguing against your own point. And I am sure the comment about posting sites wasn’t directed to me as I use all the cites you post against you. If that what conservatism is, I don’t want any part of it…this is stupid. It’s like debating with a child who doesn’t understand what they read.
LBB-
WOW..you don’t even know that Bush passed 2 tax cuts. What the F???
He passed one in 2001 and the other in 2003…wow..just….wow..
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:33 pm
Moderate@9:14, The Reps. come on board with the Dems. until ‘03 when they saw the writing on the wall. The Reps. tried again in ‘05 to rein in Fannie Mae & Freddie Mae, but met resistance from the
Dems. Whatever went on after the passage of the bill in 1992 to declare home ownership was a right was a travesty. You need to read about the entire episode. It will make you cry.
Real Athens
July 12th, 2011
9:34 pm
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:36 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:18 pm
Moderate@9:02, Again, I made comments & backed them up with govt. websites. You made comments & did not back them with tomatoes or radishes.
++++
At 8:49 in a response to you I cited the OMB tables so it would seem your comments are more reflective of yourself than me.
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:36 pm
My statement stands unchallenged. After our President Bush’s tax cutS were implemented, revenue went up.
Don’t fear facts.
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:43 pm
Allen@9:16, Yes, “Obama voted against Bush’s unjust war in Iraq” & kept it going.
He also ordered a surge in Afghanistan.
He also went to war on Libya without congressional approval. Congress learned of it from TV.
What lies about weapons of mass destruction? Wikileaks has proved otherwise.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:43 pm
National debt went up every year under Clinton. No surplus.
Source: OMB Table.
1992 4,001,787
1993 4,351,044
1994 4,643,307
1995 4,920,586
1996 5,181,465
1997 5,369,206
1998 5,478,189
1999 5,605,523
2000 5,628,700
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/hist.pdf
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:44 pm
Moderate@9:19, Where’s your website?
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:47 pm
Linda
July 12th, 2011
9:33 pm
Moderate@9:14, The Reps. come on board with the Dems. until ‘03 when they saw the writing on the wall. The Reps. tried again in ‘05 to rein in Fannie Mae & Freddie Mae, but met resistance from the
Dems. Whatever went on after the passage of the bill in 1992 to declare home ownership was a right was a travesty. You need to read about the entire episode. It will make you cry.
+++++
What makes me cry is the lack of responsibilty. Bush could get the same congress to allow him to start two wars, pass two tax increases and give away free medicine to medicare patients but these same people could not fix fannie mai and freddie mac. Did not the dems resist at least one of the wars and tax increase. It would seem in hindsight these lending laws were more important. However, to the ideological Republicans they weren’t as important as Iraq or tax cuts.
Go to Open Secrets.org and see who Freddie Mac was giving money to.
From 1992 to 2010.
Freddie Mac
Rep $4,835,834
Dem $3,771,228
Fannie Mae
Rep $2,890,395
Dem $3,052,657
Clinton "Skink" Tyree
July 12th, 2011
9:47 pm
~ The effective tax rate is the lowest in 60 years.
~ The Bush Tax Cuts have been in affect for nearly ten years. Where’s the magnificent benifits?
~ CEO pay is 750 that of the average employee at his company.
~ Tax loopholes allow companies making tens of billions in profits to avoid paying U.S. taxes ie. Exxon, General Electric and an array of other Fortune 500 companies.
~ The wealthy make most of their income from investment, so only pay capital gains taxes which are considerably lower than the income taxes paid by the average working class stiff.
If I am in a financial bind, I will difinitely cut my expenses to the bone, but, in the meantime, I’ll try to increase my income by taking on an extra part-time job. Cutting is important, but additional income is also needed to address the deficit that was created by a prescription drug program that was not carefully thought out and two ten year wars — to say nothing about the financial meltdown.
To fail to address our financial dilemna by cutting to the bone, but also eliminating tax loopholes and raises taxes in a responsible manner is spineless pandering to a fringe element who doesn’t understand the math and is only concerned with driving the ship of state into a sandbar in order to defeat President Obama.
But, the fact is, a year is a lifetime in politics and things can change dramatically. Methinks the obituary for Obama is a bit premature.
And, so it goes. . . .
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:51 pm
Clinton “Skink” Tyree: If I am in a financial bind, I will difinitely cut my expenses to the bone, but, in the meantime, I’ll try to increase my income by taking on an extra part-time job.
——————–
If you were the government, you would just take the money from someone who earned it.
Moderate Line
July 12th, 2011
9:53 pm
Year Total
Receipts Outlays Surplus or Deficit (−)
1993 1,154,335 1,409,386 -255,051
1994 1,258,566 1,461,753 -203,186
1995 1,351,790 1,515,742 -163,952
1996 1,453,053 1,560,484 -107,431
1997 1,579,232 1,601,116 -21,884
1998 1,721,728 1,652,458 69,270
1999 1,827,452 1,701,842 125,610
2000 2,025,191 1,788,950 236,241
2001 1,991,082 1,862,846 128,236
2002 1,853,136 2,010,894 -157,758
2003 1,782,314 2,159,899 -377,585
2004 1,880,114 2,292,841 -412,727
2005 2,153,611 2,471,957 -318,346
2006 2,406,869 2,655,050 -248,181
2007 2,567,985 2,728,686 -160,701
2008 2,523,991 2,982,544 -458,553
2009 2,104,989 3,517,677 -1,412,688
2010 2,162,724 3,456,213 -1,293,489
Table 1.1 oMB Table note the posite for the year surplus.
Lil' Barry Bailout
July 12th, 2011
9:54 pm
Sorry, Moderate, no sale. Those numbers paper over Clinton’s deficits by stealing the Social Security trust fund. Nice try though.
Linda
July 12th, 2011
10:00 pm
Moderate @ 9:19 & 9:20 & 9:21, Let me explain this to you. I don”t quote from FOX News & liberals don’t quote from MSNBC for the same reason. Your quoting from the White House Office of Management & Budget gives you no credibility.
Common Sense
July 12th, 2011
10:04 pm
If Mitch’s plan is to make Obama King of America, he should resign now.
Eric
July 12th, 2011
10:05 pm
Brilliant .. let Barry keep signing checks that we can’t pay for..
The sheer incompetence and ineptitude of the idiot-in-chief astounds me.. but at least we only have 16 more months… NEVER AGAIN!
Common Sense
July 12th, 2011
10:06 pm
~ The effective tax rate is the lowest in 60 years.
That’s only because incomes have dropped the most in 60 years.
Linda
July 12th, 2011
10:10 pm
what@9:33, If you had bothered to click on the website I posted, you could have easily seen that the unemployment rates during Clinton with higher tax rates were basically the same as those during Bush with lower tax rates.
It’s rather reveling that you “don’t want any part” of assessing the cites I posted.
Linda
July 12th, 2011
10:25 pm
Moderate@947, I’m so glad you brought up Open Secrets & who got what from Fannie Mae & Freddie Mae, the culprits who brought our economy to its knees. Seems that Chris Dodd of the Dodd-Frank 2000+ page bill got the most, who had been in Washington for decades. Seems that Obama got the second most moolah, the junior senator who had been in DC for 2 yrs. Why do you think that was?
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html