Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: What you should know about the debt ceiling
Explainer: What you should know about the debt ceiling
Jan 11, 2026 1:39 AM

What just happened?

In two tweets posted earlier today,President Trump attacked Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan for not tying an increase in the debt limit to a recent Veterans Affairs bill that passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support. (The bill likely would have been delayed, though, if it had been tied tothe debt limit.)

Congress must vote on whether to raise America’s borrowing limit and keep the government funded within the next month. Failure to do so could lead to a government shutdown. President Trump said on Tuesday he was willing to shut down the government to get funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall.

What is the debt limit or debt ceiling?

In most years the federal government brings in less revenue than it spends. To cover this difference, the Treasury Department has to issue government bonds which increases the national debt. The debt limit is legislative restriction on the total amount of national debt the Treasury is authorized to borrow to meet its existing legal obligations.

What is the current debt limit?

The current statutory limit on total debt issued by the Treasury is$19.809 trillion.

Shouldn’t we want Congress to refuses to raise the debt ceiling since it will lower our national debt?

The debt ceiling does not lower the national debt. The legal obligation to pay the debt has already been incurred by the government so the money is already owed. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling merely prevents the Treasury Department from borrowing money to pay the government’s bills.

When will the government run out of money to pay its bills?

The current estimate is October 2, 2017.

What happens when the government doesn’t have money to pay its bills?

As Brad Plumer explains, “The most straightforward scenario is that the puter systems would keep making payments until its checks started bouncing. And its hard to predict in advance who would get stiffed.”

Every day the Treasury Department receives more than 2 million invoices from various agencies. The Department of Labor might say, for example, that it owes a contractor $1 million to fix up a building in Denver. The puters make sure the figures are correct and then authorize the payment. This is all done automatically, dozens of times per second.

According to the Treasury Department’s inspector general, puters are designed to “make each payment in the order es due.” So if the money isn’t there, the defaults could be random.

What happens if the debt ceiling isn’t raised and Treasury can’t pay the government’s bill?

The result is that the government will default on its payments, that is, people owned money by government stop getting paid. Each month the government only brings in about 80 percent of the revenues needed to pay the bills. Some people would get paid but others would not, which could cause Americans and the rest of the world to wonder if the U.S. is serious about meeting its financial obligations. That could precipitate a global financial crisis

If the consequences are so dire, why doesn’t Congress just raise the debt ceiling already?

In a word, politics. As Kevin Hassett and Abby McCloskey of AEI note, Congresses run by both parties have used the borrowing limit as political leverage with a president. All told, congressional Democrats have been responsible for 60 percent of the increases when the debt limit was raised alongside other legislative items. Republicans were responsible for 15 percent. The remaining 25 percent occurred during divided Congresses. Of the Democratic dirties, six occurred when Democrats also controlled the White House, and 10 occurred when a Republican controlled the White House. For Republicans, all four occurred while a Democrat held the presidency.

Why do we even have a debt ceiling?

The United States has had some sort of legislative restriction on debt since 1917. But there is nothing in the Constitution that requires it and it makes little sense for Congress to separately authorize borrowing for spending that Congress has already approved. While many economists and politicians have suggested eliminating the debt limit requirement, no serious proposal to remove it is being considered. It likely won’t be as long as it can be used as a political tool.

Will we actually default on our debt?

Probably not. McConnell said on Monday,”There is zero chance—no chance—we won’t raise the debt ceiling.” Congress and the President will e to some agreement. Both the spending and debt ceiling bills can pass the Republican-led House of Representatives by a simple majority vote, but will need 60 votes to pass the Senate. Republicans only hold 52 of 100 seats, so they will need at least 8 Democratic Senators to support the measure.

Back in 1979, the government inadvertently defaulted on about $122 million worth of Treasury bills, and while the error was quickly fixed, the incident raised the nation’s borrowing costs by about 0.6 percent, or $12 billion. Most members of Congress recognize that if a minor default could have such devastating consequences, the affect of a real default could be catastrophic.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Close call on CAFTA
Close at Home The House of Representatives voted early this morning (12:03 am) to approve the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) after weeks of intense lobbying on both sides. The final vote was a close 217-215. My predictions: somehow, any dip in employment (if there is one) in the next six months will somehow be linked to CAFTA by its detractors. Detractors will attempt to take the moral high ground in American politics in ’06 and ’08, and even...
Labor unions and free association
The Service Employees International Union and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters have broken away from the plaining that the federation has focused too much on political activism in the face of declining union membership and influence. Dr. Charles Baird was a featured guest on yesterday’s edition of Kresta in the Afternoon on Ave Maria Radio, discussing Catholic perspectives on unionism and whether the modern American labor union movement patible with church teachings. Dr. Baird is Chair of the Department of...
ExTORTion
S. T. Karnick over at The Reform ments on a recent suit filed against DuPont over Teflon, claiming that “DuPont lied in a massive attempt to continue selling their product.” Karnick observes that abuse of the tort system is rampant, in part because “it has been perverted into a proxy for the criminal justice system: a means of punishing supposed wrongdoers through the use of a weaker standard of proof—preponderance of the evidence instead of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”...
Textual interpretation
A week ago Stanley Fish, a law professor at Florida International University, wrote an op-ed in The New York Times about the principles of constitutional interpretation, especially as represented by Justice Antonin Scalia. Fish takes issue especially with the notion that the text can have meaning “as it exists apart from anyone’s intention.” Fish essentially denies that texts are things that can have meanings in themselves, and it amounts to a philosophical denial of realism. Part of Fish’s problem is...
The hermeneutical spiral
Mr. Phelps takes issue with my characterization of Stanley Fish’s position as amounting “to a philosophical denial of realism.” Let me first digress a bit and place ment within the larger context of my post. My identification of a position that “words and texts have no meaning in themselves” is really just an aside within the larger and more important question about what measure of authority authorial intent has in the interpretation of documents, specifically public documents like the Constitution....
Seeing the trees, missing the forest
The United Nations has released a report on the ongoing upheavals in Zimbabwe, where tyrant Robert Mugabe has been punishing his political opponents under the guise of “cleaning up” the country’s cities. The effect of Operation Murambatsvina (meaning either “Operation Restore Order” or “Operation Drive Out Trash,” depending on who’s translation you believe) has been to leave some 700,000 people homeless, jobless, or both. A downloadable copy of the UN report is available here. While the report does illuminate the...
CAFTA/Culture of Life: enemies?
John Paul II gave us all a tremendous gift by endorsing the terms Culture of Life and Culture of Death. But as with all great gifts, we must guard these terms carefully so as not to wear them out with misuse, robbing them of their relevance. Unfortunately, this is precisely what is happening in the current debate over CAFTA. A group called Catholics for Faithful Citizenship (PDF) claims the following: “Clearly, supporting CAFTA is inconsistent with upholding a culture of...
The school of fish
The recent blogpost by my colleague Jordan Ballor discusses an op-ed written by law professor Stanley Fish. I am more familiar with Stanley Fish from his days as a literary theorist, and perhaps a quick review of a younger Fish will contribute to the conversation. Fish is known for, among other things, an idea of literary interpretation he called munities’ that suggests meaning is not found in the author, nor in the reader, but in munity in which the text...
Animal cruelty?
I’m not quite sure what to make of this local story: “Four people are charged for their alleged involvement in killing two bald eagles.” The details of the alleged crimes are as follows: “Prosecutors say two teenagers shot the eagles in the Muskegon State Game Area with a .22 caliber rifle in April 2004 and then chopped them up with a hatchet.” Since the bald eagle, one of the nation’s revered symbols, is an endangered animal, it is protected by...
Great debate
Foreign Policy hosts this exchange on environmental issues and economics. Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, gets the first word and Bjørn Lomborg, adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, gets the last word. ...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved