Debt Limit Increase (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    MT15

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Mar 13, 2019
    Messages
    19,680
    Reaction score
    26,947
    Location
    Midwest
    Offline
    This seems like it will be a potent topic during the next six months. House Rs seem to be willing to link going along with the debt limit increase, which is just a duty of Congress - good practice that should be a routine, bipartisan vote - to some really unpopular spending cuts. At the same time they rail against better tax enforcement on the truly wealthy as proposed by the democrats to increase revenue.

    Senate Rs - McConnell specifically - have told House Rs “you're on your own” on this effort.

    Will the radical Rs in the House prevail in making this an issue? Or will cooler heads take over and make this vote the routine vote it should be?
     
    I would hope cooler heads prevail, but these morons did continue to vote for McCarthy for speaker after he gave major concessions to that same radical wing.
     
    if the GOP doesn't increase the limit, they will blamed for everything that comes afterwards

    I know it was a minor procedural task that was always done without notice in the past until Newt Gingrich deciding to turn it into a political weapon/threat, which it's been ever since

    With all the catastrophic things that would occur if we didn't raise the limit and defaulted why does this even come up to a vote?
     
    if the GOP doesn't increase the limit, they will blamed for everything that comes afterwards

    I know it was a minor procedural task that was always done without notice in the past until Newt Gingrich deciding to turn it into a political weapon/threat, which it's been ever since

    With all the catastrophic things that would occur if we didn't raise the limit and defaulted why does this even come up to a vote?

    The reason it comes up to a vote is because federal law limits the amount of money the US can borrow. What SHOULD happen is the debt ceiling should be eliminated, but until it is, it needs to be voted on when it is reached.
     
    The reason it comes up to a vote is because federal law limits the amount of money the US can borrow. What SHOULD happen is the debt ceiling should be eliminated, but until it is, it needs to be voted on when it is reached.

    It really doesn't seem constitutional though.

    The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.
     
    It really doesn't seem constitutional though.

    The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.
    That’s an interesting point. Someone should challenge the law in Court.
     


    Rick Scott's pathetic attempt to explain himself for his proposal to cut SS/Medicare. His defense was "look Biden did it!". After Collins told him that Biden did not cut Medicare, rather it saved $$$ by allowing Medicare and Medicaid to negotiate drug prices, his defense was "What about Jake Tapper!!". Collins reply was, "I don't think that is the defense you think that is". What an arse. (Around the 6min part if u want to skip the whole interview).
     
    The reason it comes up to a vote is because federal law limits the amount of money the US can borrow. What SHOULD happen is the debt ceiling should be eliminated, but until it is, it needs to be voted on when it is reached.
    Btw this bullshirt only comes up when there is a Dem in the White House. It's all performative.
     
    It really doesn't seem constitutional though.

    The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

    That’s an interesting point. Someone should challenge the law in Court.

    Btw this bullshirt only comes up when there is a Dem in the White House. It's all performative.

    Both Obama and Biden recently hinted they're be willing to go this route. I'd do it just to see if those bastages brought me to court to defend the indefensible.
     
    Btw this bullshirt only comes up when there is a Dem in the White House. It's all performative.

    When you say "comes up," you mean "becomes a big issue," right? Because it's been raised repeatedly under Republican presidents (3 times under Trump if I'm not mistaken). The difference is that Democrats don't typically threaten not to increase it if their demands aren't met.
     
    When you say "comes up," you mean "becomes a big issue," right? Because it's been raised repeatedly under Republican presidents (3 times under Trump if I'm not mistaken). The difference is that Democrats don't typically threaten not to increase it if their demands aren't met.
    right.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom