It feels like the Washington summer of 2011. Debt limit politics were hurtling Congress and the White House towards a default for the first time in its history. On August 5 of that summer, Standard & Poor’s, surveying a battlefield of stalemate and brinkmanship, lowered the credit rating of the United States. It cost US taxpayers tens of billions of dollars in higher interest rate payments. S&P said:
“The downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenge.”
That was then.
American policymaking and political institutions are significantly weaker today.
The debt limit – the number of dollars the overall national debt can reach – is set by Congress by statute.
The amount of debt reflects the money Congress has voted to spend and the tax revenues that are collected.
In Washington, when Congress refuses to increase the debt limit, it means Congress is refusing to pay for the expenditures it has required the government to spend. Raising the debt limit means authorising a higher level of national debt to cover spending that has already happened.
The debt limit is like your credit card: each month, you have to pay back the money you have spent – or you go into default.
The politics of the debt limit are invidious. For three decades, Republicans have played “gotcha”: with the debt limit – especially when Democratic presidents are in the White House.
Why play “gotcha”? To go after those wild-spending, reckless radical Democrats with their out-of-control programs that add to the deficit and bankrupts the country. To get an edge in the next election for control of the House and the Senate.
It does not matter that the currency of debt-limit-gotcha politics is counterfeit – nothing to lose in making the attack.
In 2011, the Republicans demanded, with the debt limit approaching $14.3 trillion, President Obama accept $2 trillion in spending cuts – cuts that would reach deep into Medicare and a host of other domestic programs – in exchange for $800 billion in new revenues.
It was a searing confrontation. On August 1, Vice President Joe Biden met with the House Democrats to discuss what was an unholy mess. (I was in the room, and this is recounted in my book with Bryan Marshall, The Committee). That day, Biden said:
“The whole debate and debacle is not about the debt limit or the deficit. It’s about fundamentally altering how government functions. They are using the deficit they created to decimate the social structure of this country. You [the Democrats in Congress] have educated us all to how far out these guys are. There are 100 in the House and 10 in the Senate who would take this country over the cliff.”
Those “far out guy” numbers among the Republicans in this Congress have doubled.
Last week, with Joe Biden as president, House Republicans voted to raise the debt limit – provided Biden accept their cuts of $4.8 trillion in everything from health care to education to child nutrition to clean energy, and much more.
Joe Biden remembers all the lessons from the closest of calls with default 12 years ago. Those “far out guys” are now the Trump MAGA Republicans with their slash-and-burn agenda and priorities. Biden hated being muscled by them then and he has no intention of surrendering to them now and allowing them to “decimate the social structure” of the United States.
Biden also knows what the Republicans did when Trump was president. Those same Republicans increased the debt limit 3 times, by $7.8 trillion – with no government spending cuts and huge tax cuts that primarily benefited the wealthiest Americans.
Biden is asking the Republicans simply to do what they did for Trump 3 times. They have refused. They were not shocked by the Trump deficits, but the Biden deficits are a catastrophe.
Biden is done playing this game.
This is why he says he is happy to discuss government taxes and spending until the cows come home – but that raising the debt limit is “not negotiable.”
The current debt limit impasse is more dangerous than the 2011 crisis, for three reasons:
Republican Speaker McCarthy has told colleagues that the spending cuts passed by the House – by a 1-vote margin – was not a “ceiling” but a “floor” on spending cuts. In other words, he has no intention of retreating from those cuts. He cannot give them up. As Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said:
“He’s (McCarthy) stuck.How is he going to negotiate when he’s promised everyone he’s not going to change the bill? … His passing a bill was a step backward and brought us closer to default.”
A default by the United States is likely to plunge the economy into a recession that will last well into next year. While Republicans will get the blame for starting it, President Biden will get the blame for not ending it – just as he faces the voters for re-election in 2024.
There are no guardrails on how radical the Republican mood is. As Norman Ornstein, a leading US political scientist, advised last week:
“Far more than in 2011, a hard core of hard-coreextremists in the House would be fine with a default. For many, blowing up government would make theprice of economic chaos worth it; for others, the likelihood that a default would be blamed more on thepresident makes it a tempting ploy.”
President Biden is not going to dismantle his legislative achievements to capitulate to Republican demands to cut spending and cripple his presidency when they rewarded Donald Trump’s uncontrolled fiscal binges.
This crisis is much harder. Democrats will not give in to the Republicans taking the debt limit hostage and using it to harm the livelihoods of tens of millions of Americans. In the House, McCarthy dare not cut a deal with Biden that fails to get a majority of his caucus to support it. And even if he does reach a deal with Biden, the Republicans in his caucus may well move to oust him. In the Senate, any deal with Biden has to get the support of no less than 10 Republican votes. Those votes do not exist today.
The alchemy to solve this problem – substantively or procedurally – has not been invented yet.
This calculus means that default is more likely now than at any time in American history. More likely now than when Biden faced this crisis and spoke to the Democrats 12 years ago.
Bruce Wolpe is a Ticker News US political contributor. He’s a Senior Fellow at the US Studies Centre and has worked with Democrats in Congress during President Barack Obama's first term, and on the staff of Prime Minister Julia Gillard. He has also served as the former PM's chief of staff.
PM announces royal commission to address anti-Semitism and social cohesion following pressure from various communities and leaders
In Short:
– Anthony Albanese has announced a royal commission into anti-Semitism and social cohesion, led by Virginia Bell.
– The inquiry aims to foster unity in Australia amid rising tensions and concerns from various community groups.
Anthony Albanese has initiated a commonwealth royal commission into anti-Semitism and social cohesion following mounting pressure.
The inquiry, announced in Canberra, will be led by former High Court justice Virginia Bell, despite opposition from some Jewish groups.The Prime Minister stated the need for a royal commission was essential for promoting unity within Australia, particularly after engaging with families of Bondi attack victims and the Jewish community.
He confirmed discussions with NSW Premier Chris Minns and expects the single commission to run over the next 12 months, with further comments from Mr Minns anticipated soon.
The prime minister has been asked if he’s still worried a royal commission would fuel antisemitism.Anthony Albanese insists he doesn’t want the inquiry to weaken social cohesion.
“The royal commissioner will bear in mind how hearings are conducted in the processes of their conduct,” Albanese says.
“We have been working on this for weeks. I have been engaged with the community.”
The prime minister was questioned about whether it was a mistake to reject calls for a royal commission into antisemitism.Following the Bondi terror attack, the federal government faced pressure to establish such a commission.
Anthony Albanese stated that the government has implemented various measures within the 25 days following the attack.
“We have increased funding for security agencies. We have had daily briefings of the National Security Committee,” Albanese says.
“The Commonwealth have particular resources and one of the groups and individuals I’ve spoken to as well have been people outside of New South Wales,” he says.
Highly-respected former High Court judge Justice Virginia Margaret Bell is the PM’s pick to lead the royal commission.
Sustained advocacy
This decision comes after sustained advocacy from various groups, including victims’ families, former leaders, and prominent figures across sectors.
Over recent weeks, Albanese and his team had put forth several arguments against a royal commission, such as concerns over divisiveness and potential exposure of sensitive information.
Gamel Kheir from the Lebanese Muslim Association has suggested that a broader inquiry into all forms of “minority religion” discrimination is needed, expressing wariness within the Muslim community regarding the federal inquiry’s focus.
Broad Support
A significant number of community and cultural organisations back a royal commission addressing social tensions and discrimination related to the Israel-Gaza conflict.
In support of this sentiment, nearly 50 diaspora and faith groups released an open letter urging a thorough examination of rising anti-Semitism and related issues following the Bondi Beach terror attack.
US sharpens focus on Greenland; Rubio emphasizes ongoing strategic interest ahead of diplomatic talks with Denmark.
The United States is sharpening its focus on Greenland, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirming that Washington is keeping every option on the table. His comments come ahead of a high-level diplomatic meeting with Danish leaders next week.
The visit is seen as a signal of President Donald Trump’s ongoing strategic interest in the Arctic territory, which holds growing geopolitical and security significance as global competition in the region intensifies.
While the administration has not outlined specific next steps, the message from Washington is clear that Greenland remains firmly on the US agenda.
Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker
U.S. seizes two oil tankers linked to Venezuela, escalating efforts against oil smuggling and raising international legal concerns.
In a dramatic escalation of its campaign against Venezuelan oil smuggling, the U.S. has seized two oil tankers linked to Caracas. The Russian-flagged Marinera — formerly known as the Bella-1 — was captured in the North Atlantic after a weeks-long chase by U.S. forces, who allege it was violating sanctions tied to Venezuelan and Iranian oil. This rare high-seas seizure has drawn international attention due to the change of flag and the involvement of Russian maritime interests.
Meanwhile, a second vessel, the Sophia, was taken in the Caribbean in a coordinated operation against alleged sanctioned shipments. U.S. authorities describe these moves as part of a broader effort to clamp down on illicit oil flows and enforce sanctions by interdicting vessels before they can deliver crude to sanctioned buyers. The Sophia was reportedly operating with its tracking systems off, a tactic used in “dark fleet” smuggling operations.
Defense News
While the White House defends the operations as necessary to uphold sanctions and curb illicit oil trafficking, legal experts and foreign governments — especially Russia — are questioning the legality of boarding and seizing foreign-flagged ships in international waters. The debate over maritime law and sanctions enforcement is heating up as the U.S. signals it will continue to aggressively target Venezuela’s oil network.
Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker