• Stunned into silence – seconded

    What Don said.

    We’re a couple states apart, but completely on the same page. I’m usually happy to wax eloquent on how we might reduce health care spending, increase access, or improve quality. But I can’t do it right now. I don’t understand how, when you have already voted for a budget with a deficit, you can then turn around and not vote to raise the debt ceiling it requires. Heck, even Rep. Ryan’s budget required a raise in the debt ceiling. So how can anyone who voted for that bill now refuse to raise the debt ceiling, as it required?

    I have no problem with a debate on the budget, on spending, and on taxes. You have that debate when it’s time to pass the budget. You don’t pass the budget and then refuse to borrow what it requires. That makes no sense.

    Should we default, the increase on interest rates might cause us to spend more than half a trillion dollars in extra interest payments alone over the next decade. That’s more than half the cost of the PPACA.  That’s money we didn’t need to lose, it’s a waste, and it’s entirely the fault of politicians.

    Please excuse me for not feeling up to talking about how to save money in the health care system, when some in Washington can so casually risk so much.

    • I’ve heard this argument from many on the left–first from Matt Miller. The Republican position is that they’ll raise the debt ceiling when there’s a deal to address the debt. Even though their plan addresses the debt, since it wasn’t adopted, there is still no plan to address the debt. Hence, they’re not raising the debt ceiling. If they raised the debt exactly the amount they would need to to fund the government for 1 year under their own plan, I guess that would get the country 11 months or so. What have they gained? Nothing. Basically, you’re arguing they should raise the debt limit to the maximum amount their plan predicts, then cross their fingers that officials will be honorable enough to reduce the debt even though there’s less pressure to do so.

      • I don’t understand this at all.

        If they want to incorporate a plan to contain the debt into a long term budget, do that. If they can’t get that passed, that’s how the US works.

        Also, when you claim they have to “cross their fingers that officials will be honorable enough to reduce the debt”, who are the officials they don’t trust? Congress? Last I checked, if Congress passes a budget and the President signs it, that’s the budget we follow.

        As I said, I have no problem with anyone making a case for less spending and tax reform. Do so when you pass the budget. Congress voted for one late last year which requires deficit spending. I think now refusing to borrow that money (which you voted to spend), risking default, makes no sense.

        • This seems to be the same logic Eric Cantor used when arguing that the Democrats should be open to the Biden cuts. Many liberals, rightly complained that nothing’s agreed to until everything’s agreed to so they don’t have to accept the Biden cuts without any give on the other side.

          Do you believe that’s an unfair analogy? If not, then you must also be incredulous that Democrats would oppose any spending cuts that they may have agreed to as part of a larger deal.

          • I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Your example has nothing to do with what I said.

    • I wonder which of the following scenarios would result in the most consequence:

      1. I go to the bank and tell them I’d like to make a loan payment, but for whatever reasons I am unable to, so could we make an alternate arrangement, OR

      2. I go to the bank and tell them I could make a loan payment, but I choose not to?

    • The budget (as well as PPACA) was passed when the Republicans didn’t have a majority in the House, and so they don’t see it as their budget. They are trying to fix something they see as broken. So the “the budget has already passed, get over it and pay for it” bit doesn’t fly in those circles. And they’re perfectly willing to blow up the government to kill Medicare and Social Security. Republicans are anarchists and always have been. And blowing up governments is what anarchists do. Anyone thinking that a few Republicans might come to their senses and try to prevent a government shutdown is in for a nasty surprise. Republicans _like_ government shutdowns.