Biden’s First Meeting Remarks with Republican Congressional Leaders
I wish Biden’s advisors had given him some dialogue rebutting McCarthy’s plan for cuts in programs. It is this type of jawboning which make convince some, not all, citizens the need to change their minds. What is the harm, Republicans will bring to the economy over and above what the FED will incur on Labor.
Joe Biden’s remarks on the first meeting with Republicans and their holding United States citizens hostage to protect the 1% of the taxpayers making > $500,000 annually.
“And I’ll remind you the national debt went up 40 percent over the 200-year, went up 40 percent under my predecessor. And that’s the problem we’re dealing with today.”
Remarks by President Biden on Meeting with Congressional Leaders, The White House
As I said, I’ve already cut the deficit by $1.7 trillion in my first two years in office. And the budget just submitted to Congress cuts another $3 trillion in debt over the next 10 years. That is the budget I submitted.
I made it clear that we can cut spending and cut the deficit. For example, my budget cuts $200 billion in spending by strengthening Medicare’s power to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices. In addition, this is on top of the $160 billion in budget savings we passed last year by being able to reduce the price of insulin and other drugs for those on Medicare.
And my budget cuts $30 billion — $30 billion in spending on tax subsidies for Big Oil companies. They made $200 billion. They don’t need a $30 billion subsidy to drill. It makes no sense. Why are we handing them a $30 billion tax subsidy?
And, you know, it’s time to stop doing that. And that is what my budget does, among, among other things.
My budget also funds the Internal Revenue Code so that there’s enough agents to thoroughly look at the taxes of billionaires in America. This Congressional Budget Office says it would raise $200 billion. Larry Summers, a former secretary, says, says it would raise twice that amount. It’ll raise a lot of money. Why do they want to get rid of the people who, in fact, would be able to do those audits?
And my budget has some of the strongest anti-fraud proposals ever proposed. It strengthens the number of inspector generals. Remember, I know some of you covered me with my arguments in the past, with the last administration, for cutting inspector generals, as to how the money was being spent. And the inspector generals are watchdogs for taxpayers’ dollars. And it’s been estimated that we’d save $10 for every dollar spent on funding inspector generals.
My budget cuts wasteful spending, closes loopholes, and does one more thing: It makes the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations begin to start to pay some of their fair share — just some of their fair share.
Speaker McCarthy offered a very different way forward. He’s proposed deep cuts that I believe are going to hurt American families. And millions of Americans relying on Medicaid for their healthcare would be at risk of losing that.
And there would be 30 million fewer outpatient visits for veterans to the VA hospitals. And we just increased the VA budget so they could accommodate seeing these folks.
And we have to cut — we’d have to cut three- — 30,000 law enforcement agents — FBI, DEA, Border Patrol. A hundred thousand teachers and support personnel would lose their jobs.
There is a considerable risk, at this point, that both sides are all in on this.
Let chips fall where they may for now, let voters settle the issue in the 2024 election.
WRT budget cuts, the GOP wants to cut spending for the Americans they believe won’t vote for them.
WRT to the deficits and the debt, the GOP only wants spending cuts, no tax increases.
Both sides are not equivalent.
And WRT the debt ceiling, it has nothing to do with budget negotiations, it has to do with paying for what we bought.
I realize that calling the Republicans liars hurts their fee-fees. Negotiating with the GOP is a fools errand.
They want to negotiate cuts in the debt ceiling context so that they don’t have to specify what to cut as they would during budget negotiations. Forcing them into the budget process is the goal.
As it should be. The debt ceiling has nothing to do with the budget process. It has to do with the full faith and credit of the US government. Of course, the Bolshevik GOP is only interested in destroying the full faith and credit of the US government, because it believes it will destroy Biden.
US Faces ‘Significant Risk’ of Running Out of Cash in June, CBO Warns
NY Times – May 11
The Congressional Budget Office said on Friday that there was a “significant risk” that the federal government could run out of cash sometime in the first two weeks of June, setting the United States up for a default. …
The nonpartisan budget office outlined the fiscal strain facing the government as the legislative standoff continues. It also noted that the timing and revenue coming into the government, as well as its expenditures, were hard to predict.
“If the debt limit is not raised or suspended before the Treasury’s cash and extraordinary measures are exhausted, the government will have to delay making payments for some activities, default on its debt obligations, or both,” the Congressional Budget Office said in a report released on Friday.
It predicted that a default would lead to “distress in credit markets, disruptions in economic activity and rapid increases in borrowing rates for the Treasury.” …
President Biden and the four top congressional leaders, including Speaker Kevin McCarthy, were originally scheduled to meet again on Friday to discuss the debt limit after an initial face-to-face session on Tuesday produced no agreement. The second meeting is now expected to take place next week, before Mr. Biden departs on Wednesday for Japan to attend the G7 leaders’ meeting. In the interim, staff from both sides are continuing to try to reach some type of deal to avert a default.
While the decision to delay the meeting was viewed as a positive development that could allow both sides to reach consensus, it remains unclear whether an agreement can be reached in time. Mr. McCarthy has insisted on deep spending cuts and a rollback of Mr. Biden’s clean energy agenda as a prerequisite to raising the debt limit. The president has insisted that Republicans raise the borrowing cap, arguing that it simply allows the United States to pay bills that Congress has already approved.
The nation’s long-term fiscal outlook continues to be problematic and could only harden the Republican position that the government must rein in spending. In a separate report released on Friday, the Congressional Budget Office said it projected a federal budget deficit of $1.5 trillion this year — slightly higher than its forecast in February. Annual deficits are projected to nearly double over the next decade, totaling more than $20 trillion through 2033.
@Dobbs,
I’m not convinced that the deficit/debt is a “crisis.” For those who sincerely believe it is, deep cuts in defense spending and increased taxes will be on the table. As far as I can see, the only solutions offered by those crying wolf are cuts in social spending for “those people” and more tax cuts for business and the wealthy. That’s why the GOP is using the debt ceiling as a hostage–they cannot defend their solutions to the American people and they cannot embrace solutions that would make an actual difference to their base. The GOP isn’t really interested in fiscal policy, it’s interested in immiserating the poor and working class and subsidizing the rich with public funds.
Given the situation with Russia (vs Ukraine & US) and China (vs Taiwan & US), cuts in defense spending are most unlikely. So, look elsewhere. Maybe sell NASA to the highest bidder, let private industry colonize the rest of the solar system. Sell of the parts of the western US (Wyoming?) that the guv’mint isn’t too fond of but owns much of.
@Fred,
LOL! The US is never going to send troops to Ukraine or Taiwan. Our bloated military is just an invitation for political mischief.
Instead of vaguely gesturing, specifically *which* federal lands to you think should be sold and how much money do you think can be gotten for them? How does that amount compare to the federal deficit?
The best you can hope for is that Trump wins next year and makes nice with both Putin and Xi, so that Peace can then Rule the Planet.
Personally, I think it would be best if Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk can get into a bidding war over NASA. Then, what could happen afterwards (under Trump 2.0) would be the guv’mint hiring the winning bidder’s services to continue manned space efforts. Because by then, the debt limit will no longer be a problem, again.
As for US-owned real-estate…
The United States government owns 47 percent of all land in the West. In some states, including Oregon, Utah and Nevada, the majority of land is owned by the federal government. (NY Times)
@Fred,
Instead of vaguely gesturing, specifically *which* federal lands to you think should be sold and how much money do you think can be gotten for them? How does that amount compare to the federal deficit?
Should read “they cannot advocate to their base solutions that would make an actual difference.”
The ultimate problem is that McCarthy wants to remain Speaker and he will not be able to do that if he submits anything that the Dems can support and he can not accept anything short of capitulation from Biden and get the GOP votes to pass it. Ultimately, I do not see McConnell forcing default for the sake of the GOP crazy caucus but I just do not see the House coming up with anything that the Dems can accept— if they want money and votes in 2024
Be ready for some token gestures from a handful of centrist Dems which will prove to be insufficient to produce enough/any GOP votes to stop the default. This could happen!
@Fred,
I hope there will be no gestures from Democrats, except to insist on passing a clean debt ceiling bill. Budget negotiations should be reserved for negotiating on the budget. The Democrats should not reward hostage-taking.
I can see a few ‘gestures’ being made by Dems, but since no ‘Freedom Caucus’ GOP reps will join in, it will be futile & a lesson learned by Dems.
But maybe some will.
Axios: Driving the news: “I say to the Republicans out there – congressmen, senators – if they don’t give you massive cuts, you’re going to have to do a default,” Trump said at a CNN town hall on Wednesday,
“It’s better than what we’re doing right now because we’re spending money like drunken sailors,” Trump said of defaulting.
What they’re saying: Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) told Axios “there won’t be any default, that’s ridiculous,” adding, “That is a scare tactic from people who just don’t understand quite frankly, or they’re intentionally trying to deceive.”
“We shouldn’t default now or later,” said Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), expressing openness to a compromise.
“[Default] would be bad on the economy, it would be bad on the American people and it would be bad on national security,” said Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), a former Freedom Caucus member.
Between the lines: Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) suggested Trump’s comments aren’t having a major impact on how Republican lawmakers approach the debt ceiling, noting that the ex-president is “on the periphery of these things.”
“I’m a big supporter and I consider him a friend,” he said, but “when the president is in an element where he can speak openly and candidly … He’s going to say whatever he wants to.” …
Trump splits the House Freedom Caucus
Axios – May 11
“We’re not going to default on anything,” Higgins added.
The other side: Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) leapt to Trump’s defense, telling Axios that “if we enter a default situation, it might actually help us clarify some of our spending problems because a future default, if we don’t get our spending in order, is going to be much worse.”
The Case for Violating the Debt Limit Is Dangerous Nonsense
NY Times – May 14
(Or perhaps this op-ed is Dangerous Nonsense.)
… President Biden’s advisers reportedly are contemplating violating the congressional debt limit based on a far-fetched interpretation of Section 4 of the 14th Amendment propounded by some academics. Previous administrations have flirted with this idea, but all have rejected it. Mr. Biden should do the same. It would twist the words of the 14th Amendment, ignore its history and send the markets into turmoil.
Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, enacted in the wake of the Civil War, says: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law … shall not be questioned.” The immediate purpose was to prevent future Congresses (if controlled by pro-Confederate Democrats) from repudiating pension obligations and other debts incurred to win the Civil War. No doubt it applies beyond those narrow circumstances. But by its terms it does not authorize the president to borrow more money in violation of Article I, Section 8, Clause 2. Nor does it authorize the president to impose taxes in violation of Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. By its terms, it does not augment the president’s powers one iota.
Nor does Section 4 have anything to do with payment of the national debt. It does not make it unconstitutional for the United States to run out of money. Nice idea, but impossible. Section 4 prevents the only institution of government that could deny the “validity” of the debt — namely, Congress — from doing so. For the United States to fail to pay interest or principal on its debt would be financially catastrophic, but it would not affect the “validity” of the debt. When borrowers fail to make payments on lawfully incurred debt, this does not “question” the “validity” of those debts; their debts are just as valid as before. The borrowers are just in default. …
NPR to the rescue…
‘Full faith and credit’ means loaning money to US is a safe bet
NPR – May 12 (transcript)
OK, but what exactly does full faith and credit mean?
WENDY EDELBERG: Full faith and credit basically is meant to give comfort to anyone lending to the U.S. government that the U.S. government will make good on those promises no matter what.
PFEIFFER: In other words, says Wendy Edelberg, a senior economics fellow at the Brookings Institution, it means loaning money to the United States is a safe bet.
CHANG: That’s right. The phrase itself was first used by the Founding Fathers. In this context, it essentially means the country pays its debts.
EDELBERG: It has its genesis in the Constitution, which allows Congress to borrow money on the credit of the United States. So Congress is allowed to enact laws that create obligations that the U.S. taxpayer has to meet, and the U.S. taxpayer then has to stand behind those obligations.
PFEIFFER: And if the United States can’t raise the debt ceiling, it can’t meet the financial obligations that Edelberg is talking about.
CHANG: And not paying your bills makes lenders worry that it’s too risky to loan money to the U.S. or jeopardizes the full faith and credit of the United States.
EDELBERG: Calling into question whether or not the U.S. government will really make good on its obligations and pay its bills, it makes perfect sense to bring this phrase in, that it calls into question the full faith and credit of the United States.
…
Unfortunately and somewhat surprisingly, ‘full faith & credit’ supposedly has nothing to do with paying debts:
The meaning of FULL FAITH AND CREDIT is the recognition and enforcement of the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of one state by another. (Merriam Webster)
Full faith and credit is the requirement, derived from Article IV, Section I of the Constitution, that state courts respect the laws and judgments of courts (Law.Cornell.Edu)
Is the budget passed by both houses and signed by the POTUS not law? Is it not a public act? I don’t see how the dictionary definition excludes paying for spending mandated by legal statute.
Perhaps so. One can only hope.
Comments posted in the NYT regarding this piece from a Hoover Institute prof at Stanford, suggest that the op-ed is indeed ‘Dangerous Nonsese’.
The NYT op-ed is by a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. Take it with a large pile of salt.
Joel
I agree with you. But you don’t advance your cause with expressions like “fee fees.”
Otherwise, the man from Hooverville is a good example of how a well educated person can string a lot of words together meaning nothing, certainly nothing real.
The framers tried to save us from falling into tyranny, but their big idea depended on all the rival players understanding that if they don’t play by the rules, they endanger the system that protects them from the other guy cheating as well. We apparently now have a Congress, or at least a Party, that is either too stupid to understand that, or sincerely believes that by cheating it can achieve absolute power for a thousand years, so it won’t have to worry about being nice to anyone.
a very nice talk about fascism with relevance to the politics of shaping mobs
with quotes from the experts:
[relevance is that Trump showed it was possible in USA and the money behind the R’s is going for it…the thousand year reich. language purists won’t like the comparison with nazi germany, but it might be instructive to look at their understanding of the tools. i think the author/speaker misses the point that “blood and soil” is not the only ideology that can play the role of a “spiritual” belief around which the primitive feelings of ordinary men can be shaped to glue those ordinary men into a mindless mob.]