All anybody in Washington can talk about these days is the debt limit or debt ceiling – the total amount of money the federal government is authorized to borrow at any given time. After a decade in which spending increased by more than 60 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars and the debt limit was raised no fewer than 10 times, the government is about to max out its $14.3 trillion credit line, leading to fears that Washington is going to default on its bonds, stop cutting Social Security checks, and destroy the economy more than it already has.

But the current debate over the debt ceiling is full of malarkey for at least three reasons.

1. August 2 is a phony deadline. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has pushed back the drop-dead date when the U.S. finally reaches its limit a bunch of times already: March 31, April 15, May 31 were all cited as deadlines before August 2 was inked in as Armageddon. But this time, he means it, man, really.

2. Reaching the debt ceiling is NOT the same as defaulting on our debt – which would indeed be catastrophic.

Think about it: You can max out your credit cards but as long as you keep paying the minimum amount due each month, your creditors don’t go crazy. Interest on the debt is a small fraction of total outlays and the government has a series of tools – from using cash on hand to selling assets to scrimping on nonessential payments – to make sure interest payments are made and seniors aren’t put on an all cat-food diet.

3. Legislating-by-Panic is no way to run a country. The reason we’re in this mess is because government can’t stop spending. And the government can’t even pass a budget on a year’s notice. But we’re expecting them to come up with a good plan for the country’s borrowing in a couple of weeks? Trying to force through an expansion of the country’s credit line by promising cuts in spending down the road is exactly why we’re in this situation to begin with.

It makes far more sense to do something like sell some TARP assets — the government is sitting on $320 billion in outstanding direct loans and equities investments — to cover interest payments through the end of the fiscal year than to force Congress and the president to come up with a budget that cuts spending — and borrowing — for real, next year, not is some distant future.

(more…)

The media are reporting that if a governmental shutdown occurs, it will affect only “nonessential services and personnel.” Now, call me superficial, but I have a question:

At a time when we face a $1.4 trillion deficit this year alone, why are we funding anything or anyone that is admittedly “nonessential”?

I have been pondering an analogy that ought to be easy for anyone to grasp. Let’s compare the current congressional battle over federal spending with a hypothetical family feud over your own household budget.

Suppose you and your spouse are arguing about your finances. You have discovered, to your horror, that you are spending $1,400 per month over and above your total household income. Terrified, you inform your spouse that this is completely insane and unsustainable, and that it must stop immediately.

Your spouse nods in nominal agreement — but then digs in his or her heels against every single specific spending cut that you propose.

Knowing of your partner’s stubborn, spendthrift ways, you eventually propose just $100 in reduced spending. That would still have you falling behind each month by $1300, but at least it’s a start. However, your spouse is outraged and rejects the figure out of hand; it’s “draconian,” and would undermine the profligate lifestyle to which you’ve become accustomed.

You argue, and argue, and argue. Getting nowhere, and desperate for any point of agreement, you say: “Look, can’t we cut just $61 from our monthly spending? We both know that this won’t even make a dent in our obligations, but at least it might slow our rush toward bankruptcy, if only by a few days.”

(more…)

With the Federal government scheduled to shut down on April 8, Congress is not only debating where to spend trillions of dollars in the next fiscal year, but also whether to raise the roof, i.e. the debt ceiling.  The debt ceiling simply represents a cap on the total debt the U.S. government can hold, and it is currently set at a whopping $14.294 trillion.  Though the resolution for this limit was signed a mere year ago, we are quickly approaching the limit and should reach it sometime in the first week of April.  Keep in perspective that it would take more than 31,000 years of earning $1 a day to make a measly $1 trillion of the total debt. The government has added to the total debt every year since 1960 (except for two years).  Worse yet, it has added over $5 trillion in the past three and a half years alone.  Wouldn’t common sense indicate that there’s little room to borrow more?  Apparently not.

The reality is that many lawmakers want to “stabilize the debt” by increasing the debt ceiling.  Of course, you can’t stabilize trillions of dollars.  So essentially, the government ends up selling more bonds just to pay interest on the national debt and pay for new spending.  What’s a few more hundred billion when you already owe several trillion?

Often, to explain how we must increase the debt ceiling, government plays on one major fear – the fear of U.S. default.  Those in support of raising the debt ceiling argue that if it’s not increased the government will not be able to meet obligations.  They essentially say the country will go bankrupt.  To prevent this very issue, the debt ceiling has been raised 74 times since March 1963.  The problem with this rationale is that it’s like urging a boat to take on more water to keep it from sinking.  Imagine meeting with your financial planner and hearing him say, “In these tough financial times I recommend you add to your debt in order to stay solvent.”  I hope you would quickly find a new financial planner.

(more…)

The Democrats are holding a press conference at this afternoon to blast Senator Tom Coburn’s demand that new programs and increased spending approved by Congress be paid for.

At issue is a veterans bill that the Senators would like to pass and issue press releases praising themselves for supporting over Congress’ Veterans Day vacation.  Problem is the bill is not paid for and therefore is just another bounced checked to be charged to future generations of Americans who are already inheriting the $12 trillion debt created by Congress’ reckless addiction to borrowing and spending.   In addition to not being paid for, the bill discriminates against many vets who sacrificed for our nation and were injured as a result.

coburn letter –

(more…)