# The McConnell rule on debt ceiling **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 23, 2013, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mcconnell-rule-on-debt-ceiling/672022 "2013-10-23T12:44:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mcconnell-rule-on-debt-ceiling/672022/1 "2013-10-23T12:44:38Z")
Yesterday’s NY Times had an editorial titled “How to disarm the debt-ceiling threat for good” which said, in part: > [@](#): > > This rule, which was used in last week’s settlement and other agreements for the last two years, allows the president to raise the debt ceiling and then gives Congress a chance to disapprove it. If Congress passes a disapproval measure, the president can veto the legislation. The two chambers would then each need a two-thirds majority to override the veto and prevent the debt limit from rising, which is politically unattainable and is likely to remain so. See [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/22/opinion/how-to-disarm-the-debt-ceiling-threat-for-good.html?\_r=0](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/22/opinion/how-to-disarm-the-debt-ceiling-threat-for-good.html?_r=0) for the full editorial. Can anyone explain what is the status of this “rule”. An agreement between the parties cannot overrule a statute. If it was actually a law, then why didn’t Obama employ it? If not an actual law, isn’t it meaningless? Why hadn’t it been mentioned before? I read the editorial several times and I could not figure out what it was really saying. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mcconnell-rule-on-debt-ceiling/672022/2 "2013-10-23T17:12:44Z")
It wasn’t used to end the shutdown/debt ceiling problem, it was enacted as part of the vote to end the shutdown. No effect on this past debt ceiling fight, but may well hamstring future fights. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mcconnell-rule-on-debt-ceiling/672022/3 "2013-10-23T17:23:29Z")
People got really confused about this in another thread. The law simply says Congress is giving the President permission to increase the debt ceiling to a certain amount, and that he has until a certain date to do so. It’s basically a time-dated permission slip. The President does not have a general power to do this, he only has power on this issue that legislation gives him, and the legislation gave him temporary power to do this. The NY Times Editorial Board’s proposal in that article is a political nonstarter by the way. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-mcconnell-rule-on-debt-ceiling/672022/4 "2013-10-23T17:30:53Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > It wasn’t used to end the shutdown/debt ceiling problem, it was enacted as part of the vote to end the shutdown. No effect on this past debt ceiling fight, but may well hamstring future fights. It was only enacted temporarily, and ends at the same time the latest deal to extend the ceiling ends, so it won’t really effect anything in the future either. It was originally added basically as a political gimick, the GOP thinking they could use it to pass a bunch of laws ending the debt ceiling extension and then forcing the Dems to block it, so “Senator so and so voted to raise more debt x number of times” could be used in campaign ads. Given how negatively the public reacted to the latest set of debt-ceiling games, though, I doubt it will see use even for that purpose.