Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Do Republicans Have the Temerity to Hold the Debt Ceiling?
Red Meat Conservative ^ | 01/13/11 | Daniel

Posted on 01/13/2011 10:38:56 AM PST by red meat conservative

The Democrats have a habit of sabotaging our economy and then demanding that we pass their legislation to avert impending doom that would result from their original policies.  Unfortunately, Republicans credulously accept their premises and acquiesce to the emergency legislative actions.  We watched this unfold during the debate over TARP, in which Republicans naively bought into the notion that the Great Depression would return unless they supported the Democrat bailouts.  We agonized over it when Republicans agreed to extend unemployment welfare and ethanol subsidies for another year, lest taxes go up for a week in January.

The same dynamic is now unfolding with the debate concerning the debt ceiling.  The national debt currently stands at $13.95 trillion, as we accrue over $100 billion in new debt every month.  By that calculation, we will surpass the $14.29 trillion debt ceiling in less than three months.  The Democrats are demanding that Republicans consummate and perpetuate their unconstitutional spending habits by raising the debt ceiling, or suffer the peril of defaulting on our credit.

Never mind that it was the Democrats who caused the credit, housing, and budget crises in the first place!  They seem to forget that programs like TARP, bailouts, porkulous, union payoffs, cash-for-clunkers, 99 weeks of unemployment benefits, Franken-Dodd, and Obama Care are the culprits for the doubling of the national debt.  Should the Republicans reward the pillagers by granting them one more opportunity to purloin the taxpayers?  Are we ever going to stop passing the buck down and indefatigably fight against big government in the present?  Even the much anticipated repeal of Obama Care was oddly postponed to placate the Democrats' shameless politicization of the Tucson shooting.  Why not start reversing the $1.4 trillion deficit now?

Instead of falling into their sinister trap once again, we must uproot their premise by demanding a lowering of the spending floor.  If we lack the intransigence to block Democrat proposals due to threats of peril, how many more Democrat initiatives will we support under the guise of "a one time emergency fix"?  Will Republicans support one last tax increase on Social Security to preclude its bankruptcy?

Here is another important question to consider.  If we don't strike out at the heart of the dependency state when the public finally has an apatite for spending cuts, then when will we ever cut the debt?  It is well known that Republican consultants have more regard for positive polling data than principled conservative policies.  But the reality is that the public now supports the Republicans on issues of spending more than ever.  In fact, according to a new Reuters poll, the public opposes raising the debt limit by a whopping 78-19 margin.  We will never enjoy a higher level of support for any conservative issue, let alone for aggressive spending cuts.  The Democrats are the ones who are forced into an awkward position on the issue of the debt ceiling, so why back down now?

Unfortunately, it appears that Congressmen Steve King and Michelle Bachmann are lonely in their opposition to raising the debt limit.  Most Republicans are buying into the argument that we will face imminent default if we fail to raise the debt limit immediately. 

To that end, we must be prepared to force a compromise.  Not the sort of "bi-partisan compromise" that gives the farm away to the Democrats, but one that would permanently undermine their ability to spend.  Rand Paul and others have suggested that we demand a balanced budget amendment in return for a temporary increase in the debt limit.  I think that a more prudent and strategic demand would be the passage of Mike Pence's Spending Limit Amendment.  This would automatically limit spending to no more than 20% of GDP, except when there is a declaration of war.  This is far superior to the balanced budget amendment because it directly attacks the spending side of the ledger and denies the Democrats the opportunity to raise taxes to balance the budget.  Also, many states have balanced budget amendments, yet they are able to run a structural deficit, while using accounting gimmicks to complete their balance sheets.  Now is the time to demand direct and permanent spending cuts.

The bottom line is that we must make our stand now.  With bloated government spending crowding out private investment, the U.S. has fallen to ninth place in the Heritage Index of Economic Freedom.  We need to ensure that any increase in the debt limit is less than $200 billion, while demanding a permanent budgetary fix in exchange for the increase.  Otherwise, we will continue to repair the disastrous results of big government with more increases in government.  After all, who has the heart to let the country go bankrupt and the poor eat dog food?


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: debt; house; rinos; spending

1 posted on 01/13/2011 10:39:00 AM PST by red meat conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative

No, The Republicans are stooges for the big banks. They want endless bailouts for their friends.


2 posted on 01/13/2011 10:50:50 AM PST by Squidster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative

When will we ever cut the debt? Never, the ruling class has lost touch with what America really is. The money will continue to flow, long after the dollar is considered worthless. Protect yourself now by buying Gold, Silver and land before this house of cards come crashing down.


3 posted on 01/13/2011 10:54:33 AM PST by 2001convSVT (That Beck guy was right about gold, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative
This will be the deciding factor for me. If they raise it then I think we are all doomed. And it really doesn't matter for who or for which part you vote for.
4 posted on 01/13/2011 10:55:57 AM PST by IC Ken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative

If they agree to a spending limit they have just bought the Obama deficits and they will get to own them. Agreeing to anything other than a balanced budget will cut the legs right out from under themselves and they’ll have nothing to run on in 2012; they may as well appoint Obama president through 2016 right now.

If you can’t cut spending when you are teetering on the edge of collapse, you are a hopeless drunk who has no business driving much less trying to run a country.

For me, agreeing to accept responsibility for Obama’s deficits is the end of the GOP and a sad end it is. We didn’t send these guys to Washington to help Obama govern, we sent them to stop him from governing. Stop him. Don’t join him. Stop him.


5 posted on 01/13/2011 10:59:20 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marron
"If they agree to a spending limit" supposed to be "If they agree to a spending limit increase"
6 posted on 01/13/2011 11:00:34 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative

This is the trick they pull every time. Run the budget so far into the red, and then weep that if we don’t give them more money, they’ll have to lay off firemen and teachers.

We fall for it every time.


7 posted on 01/13/2011 11:05:52 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Squidster

“Say the magic word, the duck flies down and you win $100.”

Today’s magic word is “Stooge.”

;-)


8 posted on 01/13/2011 11:10:16 AM PST by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative

I am not sure what not raising the debt ceiling would mean. As I understand it, without the raising of the debt ceiling, there would be no money to pay the interest on the national debt, so we would default? Does it mean that we have spent all the money set aside to operate the country six months into the year and that there will be no money to run the country and pay for things like bullets for the military after March? Or does it mean that there is no money beyond that which is budgeted?


9 posted on 01/13/2011 11:19:33 AM PST by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marsh2

Only about a third of spending is accounted for in interest rates.

Revenues are around 3 trillion on 4.5 trillion spending. Getting the deficit down to Bush days, would put it around 200 billion not 1.5 trillion that it is now.

So you’d have to keep 1.5 trillion in debt repayments and cut 1.3 trillion of 3 trillion dollars of discretionary spending.

This is why everyone is opposed to raising the debt limit, because the deficit is just insane thanks to Obama. So they would have to halve the size of the federal government just to keep their head above water.


10 posted on 01/13/2011 11:55:47 AM PST by BenKenobi (Rush speaks! I hear, I obey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marsh2

Edit, I’m wrong.

The US is paying about 200 billion on 3 trillion dollars of revenue or about 6.67 percent.

Why so low? Interest rates are at a historical low right now.


11 posted on 01/13/2011 12:04:25 PM PST by BenKenobi (Rush speaks! I hear, I obey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marsh2

To fix the deficit, they would have to cut down to 2.8 trillion of discretionary spending, from 5 trillion of discretionary spending.

To get the debt to Bush levels, they could have 3 trillion in spending, so they would still need to cut back 60 percent of discretionary spending just to get back to even.

Discretionary spending under the Obamacare regime has increased from 2.8 trillion to around 5. So they’ve basically spent twice as much. He has added close to 4 trillion of debt in 2 years, 4 trillion on 14 trillion total in debt, making the US as indebted as it has been since the Truman administration.


12 posted on 01/13/2011 12:08:40 PM PST by BenKenobi (Rush speaks! I hear, I obey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative

The ramifications of raising the debt ceiling are bad. The ramifications of not raising it are much worse. Anyone who thinks it won’t be raised or shouldn’t be raised is living in a dream world.

The real test is not the debt ceiling, it will be raised, after the posturing ends. We must implement real cuts in spending. This will happen either voluntarily or involuntarily over the next 5-7 years.

Our economy will struggle for the next 7-10 years as we work through this. If we are lucky, politicans will make real and difficult cuts in spending before they cuase a worldwide economic collapse and a World War.

We are going to be faced with choices that are either bad or worse for a long time. There is no easy way out. It’s pain and danger all the way. Pray that we can stay on this high wire over the next decade.


13 posted on 01/13/2011 12:27:37 PM PST by SaxxonWoods (Gone Galt and loving it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red meat conservative

It is hard for me to understand the relationship between the budget and actual money as local government has to work within the restraints of a balanced budget and cannot spend more than the money it has without some sort of bond.

Ok, we are six months into a “no budget” continuance of the prior year’s budget. If we are to reach the debt ceiling in March at the half year mark of the continuing budget, then how are we to cut discretionary spending for the remaining 6 months to offset the overage without halting government entirely and continuing only essential life threatening functions? Seems like we have spent everything allotted in the first six months. (Local government would have to shut down if the money was all spent six months into the year.) The TP Repubs. can’t not approve a rise in the debt ceiling for at least debt service and essential functions. It would seem the Dept. of Education, much of Health and Human Services, Commerce, EPA, DOI should just shut down with a moratorium on programs and regulatory enforcement until next year. Is that where they are going?

I don’t think the American public understands that you can’t refuse to raise the debt ceiling without extreme consequences. They will still be expecting their SS checks.


14 posted on 01/13/2011 1:22:43 PM PST by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marsh2

The debt ceiling does not relate to any annual budget. It is the total national debt, and it can be reached at any time.

“I don’t think the American public understands that you can’t refuse to raise the debt ceiling without extreme consequences. They will still be expecting their SS checks.”

Yes. Many don’t understand or in their silliness think refusing to raise the ceiling would somehow be a good idea. Our far flung military would be hung out to dry, without supplies or pay, and the riots in the streets of America after cutoff of entitlements would be very expensive to the victims of such riots, mainly property owners. Most insurance policies don’t cover riots.

The debt ceiling will be raised of course, so we will avoid those consequences for the time being.


15 posted on 01/13/2011 2:23:35 PM PST by SaxxonWoods (Gone Galt and loving it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: marsh2

Oh, I forgot one thing. The party that stops the raising of the debt ceiling will be completely destroyed in the election that follows such an action.


16 posted on 01/13/2011 2:25:25 PM PST by SaxxonWoods (Gone Galt and loving it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson