# Second-guessing Dems on the Debt **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [May 19, 2023, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287 "2023-05-19T17:37:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/61 "2023-05-28T12:17:46Z")
OK, the deal includes $10 billion cut out of the $80 billion Biden got to go after high income tax cheats. Increasing the IRS budget brings down the deficit, so this decrease goes directly against what the GOP claims they want. Of course, they don’t give a shit about the deficit, but they do care a lot about protecting their rich friends. It also includes some new work requirements for welfare recipients. While this might sound OK in theory to people, the problem is that it makes it harder to get benefits you’re actually eligible for. That is, people will have to prove some kind of work arrangement or show why they don’t need it, and if they get it wrong, they could lose out, even if it’s something they are entitled to. So, more rich tax cheats and poor people getting screwed out of benefits they should be getting. What’s not to love? Since this is a thread about second-guessing the Dems, I will say that rather than pooh-poohing the various work-arounds all along (minting the coin, interest-only debt, 14th Amendment, whatever), they should have said that all options are on the table in order to avoid default. Rather than doing that, the administration made fun of or discounted these extraordinary measures, which immediately strengthened the Republicans’ hand. This has been poorly managed from the start. ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/62 "2023-05-28T12:59:20Z")
Honestly, this deal (based only on what’s being reported) is . . . kinda OK? It’s about what you’d expect out of a budget negotiation with divided government. The hostage taking over the debt limit is terrible, but that horse has been out of the barn for a while. Edit: I should learn to read, @iiandyiiii already made the same point. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/63 "2023-05-28T14:11:14Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > good luck getting the Republican nihilists on board They won’t be, but it doesn’t matter provided the majority of both parties vote for it. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/64 "2023-05-28T14:42:33Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > Rather than doing that, the administration made fun of or discounted these extraordinary measures, which immediately strengthened the Republicans’ hand. This has been poorly managed from the start. They may have done that behind the scenes. One thing I read recently is that Obama tried negotiating in public, and that was rarely effective, while Biden negotiates in private. And this is definitely a better compromise than Obama ever got, AFAICT. ---
**Author:** ![Meltdown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Meltdown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meltdown)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/65 "2023-05-28T15:03:04Z")
This may not have been Biden’s intention, but here’s one possible upside to the compromise (assuming it goes through): since he was running for president, Biden has always said that he’s the one who could bring biparitsanship back. This deal feels like neither side got everything they wanted, so it feels like it’s kind of a win for bipartisanship. Granted, both McCarthy and Biden can claim credit for that, but Biden is the one running for president in 2024. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/66 "2023-05-28T15:05:08Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > What on earth makes you think “the banks” or anyone else in the financial markets wants things done this way? … > > And it hasn’t “always been done” like this. For most of history, this was nothing more than a technicality However, over a generation now the gamesters in the political class have successfully talked into being this scenario that this way of doing things is somehow essential to general financial stability, never mind the first 200 years of the Republic. That is bulldada but they have driven it so hard that by now a lot of sectors accept it as just the way it is. And though it has been the Gingrichites and Freedom Caucusers who have been weaponizing it, the respective Executives have not hesitated to use the “OMG, if the Reps have their way they are going to crash the whlole world economy!” argument, acknowledging their power. > [@Riemann](#): > > Since it really was only ever a technicality, it seems bizarre to me that anyone is opposed to resolving it in any manner that is technically valid under the Constitution. It’s not as though anyone ever set things up this way because this stupid game every few years is what they envisioned. The government/lawyerly classes tend to be highly enamored of procedural regular order and it just so happens that our legislative system is tailor-made for NOT getting things done. And from the POV of the legislative branch, this is a way of giving themselves a third at-bat about the power of the purse: 1: the _authorization_ to do things, up to no more than a certain cost ; 2: the _appropriation_ to pay for the things within that authorization ; 3: if current revenue doesn’t cover _that_, to extend how much more to take on credit – they used to lump these together in just one or two steps but as things got more complicated someone figured it was easier to approve things we like separately from sourcing the money to pay them, and to punt the hard parts, so here we are. As has become obvious here, that turns out to be a mighty powerful weapon to have on their side, and besides the being able to use it against an Executive with whom they may be at odds, there’s… > [@Riemann](#): > > there are huge economic costs already being borne… [and] it’s already affecting the stock market,” Dimon said, and “number three, we should get rid of this debt ceiling — we don’t need to have this kind of brinksmanship every couple of years.” …the satisfaction of saying to themselves, _“hot damn, something that makes Wall Street FEAR **US**!”_ and can you imagine them giving that up? ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/67 "2023-05-28T15:34:43Z")
It’s pretty common for me to read a thread here and realize that I’m in a completely different political universe from most of the people on this board, but every once in a while I’m still really taken aback. I will understate my position somewhat and say: I don’t think this was a victory for bipartisanship. I do not think it augurs well for ongoing comity between the parties. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/68 "2023-05-28T16:24:06Z")
> [@flurb](#): > > It’s about what you’d expect out of a budget negotiation with divided government. Then it should have been done as part of the budgeting process, just a few short months away, not under threat of global economic meltdown. The Republicans know that their actual budget priorities are extremely unpopular (more rich people cheating on their taxes! Cut veteran benefits (part of their initial proposal)! Cut corporate taxes and raise taxes on the middle class!), so they can only get those priorities passed through economic terrorism. They run on anti-woke and transphobia, but those aren’t actual policies, just things that get the bigots to the polls. Then, they push to transfer more money upward. > [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > I will understate my position somewhat and say: I don’t think this was a victory for bipartisanship. I agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/69 "2023-05-28T22:34:52Z")
Here’s a consideration on the “debt deal” – in order for the bill to be brought to the House floor, it will have to be reported from the House Rules Committee. This is the committee that sets the “rule” for how a bill will be considered, e.g. how much time will be allowed for debate, what amendments will be allowed, etc. The Rules Committee has always been stacked by the Speaker with his or her closest allies because of its importance. But one of the concessions McCarthy made to secure the gavel was to appoint several Freedom Caucus members to the committee. If those members vote against reporting a rule, McCarthy will need support from Democrats on the committee. But the tradition in the Rules Committee is that the minority party always votes no on a rule. I guess we’ll see how much McCarthy shot himself in the foot when he threw that bone to the FC. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2023, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/70 "2023-05-28T23:57:04Z")
> [@flurb](#): > > And if it fails because of lack of Republican votes, then Biden still has the extraordinary options, plus the benefit of McCarthy likely being ousted and more chaos in the Republican ranks. If it fails, it will because of lack of votes from both parties. I realize that there will be a case to be made otherwise, but that will require some awfully wonky arguments about who was supposed to do what in the rules committee. Just interested — why would McCarthy be ousted? Is it because all Democrats would vote for a motion to vacate, so it would only take five or so Republicans who don’t like the deal on top of that? In other words, is it true that virtually all Democrats would vote for a motion to vacate initiated by extreme right-wingers? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/71 "2023-05-29T02:11:55Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > Of course, they don’t give a shit about the deficit, but they do care a lot about protecting their rich friends. Yet allowing the US to default would cost their rich friends oodles of money. More than will benefit from some budget cuts. ---
**Author:** ![DeadTreasSecretaries](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deadtreassecretaries/32/4817_2.png) [@DeadTreasSecretaries](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadTreasSecretaries)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/72 "2023-05-29T03:40:26Z")
As a practical matter McCarthy’s speakership wouldn’t be threatened by a few of the extreme conservatives - it would be threatened if a majority of the house GOP wanted to oust him. I don’t think even the crazies will try to vote him out as speaker (i.e. a vote of the entire house) but if they do the dems should absolutely also vote him out and expose the GOP’s disunity. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 9:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/73 "2023-05-29T09:39:59Z")
I’m not going to try and explain what’s going on in the fevered minds of today’s Republican politicians. They pretend to care about the deficit and then they cut funding to the IRS, which increases the deficit. They pretend to care about veterans (OMG, they basically worship them) and then they try and cut funding for veteran benefits. I’ll leave it to someone else in some other thread to try and explain it. This thread is about the Dems – sorry for starting the hijack. Back to the Dems, in a 4% inflation environment, they are essentially agreeing to cut spending by 7% over the next couple of years, with no sign of increasing revenue (just decreasing it, through the cuts to the IRS). They control the Senate and the Presidency. I don’t see how you spin this as a win. In two years, if they still control anything after this debacle, it happens again. Obama also caved on spending cuts in 2011 that harmed the US economy while it was still reeling from the Great Recession. He learned his lesson and didn’t cave in 2013. I guess every president has to relearn that lesson. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/74 "2023-05-29T09:47:19Z")
Any budget would have had to pass the House - compromise would have had to happen. Best case scenario for Democrats would have been Republicans agreeing to spending at existing levels, which is essentially what this deal contains. What else were you expecting? ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 9:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/75 "2023-05-29T09:57:29Z")
A clean bill or a workaround now, and then a budget during the actual budgeting process which is coming up. Then, if they don’t agree, the government shuts down, but the global economy isn’t wrecked. A shutdown puts pressure on both parties to figure something out. Also, the budgeting process would force the GOP to lay out their priorities more clearly, and those priorities are very unpopular. People say they want budget cuts, but they don’t want anything in particular cut. Now, that’s all hidden away in the drama of avoiding default, Biden looks weak (he said he a clean bill was non-negotiable), McCarthy looks stronger. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/76 "2023-05-29T10:17:27Z")
I want to add something else here. The Treasury Department has been taking special measures since January or February to avoid default – that’s when the debt ceiling was actually reached. That would have been a good time for Biden to say, “We have to increase the amount of debt outstanding now, we’re not going to take on additional costs of juggling payments in and out. Congress requires me to collect and spend this amount of money, so I either break the spending laws that Congress has passed or the debt ceiling law. I choose to break debt ceiling law and I’m instructing the Treasury Department to issue an additional $1 billion in debt. That will give time for this question to work through the courts using a relatively small amount of debt while we continue the extraordinary measures to avoid default.” ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/77 "2023-05-29T10:27:57Z")
It’s not hidden away - the Republicans passed a terrible bill that slashes everything, and Democrats can use those votes next campaign. I agree that the debt ceiling should go away, but other than that I don’t see how this is any worse than we would have been with normal budget negotiations. And now it’s all over, with no shutdowns or ceiling fights that Republicans might try to use for 2024. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/78 "2023-05-29T10:42:47Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Any budget would have had to pass the House - compromise would have had to happen. Best case scenario for Democrats would have been Republicans agreeing to spending at existing levels, which is essentially what this deal contains. > > What else were you expecting? This is not a budget fight. This is a debt ceiling fight which is just agreeing to pay money they agreed to spend in the past. It is paying the country’s credit card bill. Not deciding what to put on the credit card next (budget debates). 14th amendment. Pay our bills. Period. What republicans are doing is extortion. Literally extortion. I was expecting Biden to grow a pair and tell them to fuck off. I’d expect republican wealthy donors, who stand to lose boatloads of cash if the US defaults, to tell their lackeys to not mess with this and fight elsewhere. But, here we are. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/79 "2023-05-29T12:45:02Z")
I agree with all that - and yet Biden got a “compromise” that was as good or better, in political terms for 2024, than any likely agreement if they had dealt with the budget separately. Republicans extorted nothing. One of the hallmarks of being a Democrat is always complaining about everything - it’s somewhat comforting to see that continue. ---
**Author:** ![DeadTreasSecretaries](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deadtreassecretaries/32/4817_2.png) [@DeadTreasSecretaries](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadTreasSecretaries)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2023, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287/80 "2023-05-29T13:40:23Z")
With the caveat that I need to delve more into the details: It’s small but there appears to actually be a year-over-year cut to nondefense discretionary spending, which is a conceivable outcome for just a budget negotiation. If there had been no debt ceiling fight and the dems agreed to make work requirements more expensive in a normal budget deal that would be an awful deal. Also it looks like there’s going to be a sequester-lite which would also be pretty awful to give up if you ignore the hostage taking. IMO it’s going to be hard for Biden to argue that the debt ceiling was largely theater on top of what would have happened anyway with the budget. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/second-guessing-dems-on-the-debt/984287.md?page=5)