House denies debt limit hike -- but it doesn't matter

CBS/iStockphoto

The House of Representatives voted to deny President Obama a $1.2 trillion debt limit increase for the federal government to cover its existing obligations today. The vote, however, doesn't mean much.

When Republicans negotiated a deal over the summer with President Obama to increase the debt ceiling, they agreed that the president would get the money in two steps: $900 billion when the deal first passed and another $1.2-$1.5 trillion dollars later. That second increase would be subject to a "Resolution of Disapproval" to deny that second increase.

Sounds threatening, but even if the Resolution passed both the House and the Senate, the President could veto the measure. Congress would then need 2/3eds of both chambers to override that veto. Judging by the 239-176 vote in the House today, just six Democrats joined Republicans in voting for the resolution, that's extremely unlikely.

Republicans, however, got another chance to vote against increasing the debt ceiling. And most Democrats go on the record, again, supporting the increase, which is good election year ammunition for the GOP.

"Less than six months removed from last summer's so-called debt crisis, the House is on the verge of committing another act of generational embezzlement, we are on the verge of signing another $1 trillion of debt to our progeny because we can't muster the courage to make hard decisions" said freshman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) on the House Floor.

His colleague from South Carolina, Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC), made it out to seem like a loan to President Obama, asking if would "ever really intend to pay it back" and criticized the President's budget.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was asked about the process at her weekly press conference with reporters today. She called the vote today an exercise that reflects "juvenile behavior" by House Republicans.

Pelosi said that Republicans "were willing to jeopardize the full faith and credit of the United States of America to such an extent that our credit rating was downgraded, to such an extent that our credit rating was downgraded, to such an extent that our reputation for seriousness was questioned. I think sent a message to the American people that it was important for them to know about the tea party Congress."

The Senate is expected to take up the same resolution next week, where it is more likely to be rejected.

[washmohickory]

The tea party are the only ones trying to get a handle on this debt incurrred by both parties. Go to http://balanceourbudget.com/ and watch your government at work. Watch your grandchildrens future becoming like Greece.

[moretruthnow]

The tea party in the House have insanely stood against our government being able to send checks to the military, Social Security, Medicare and every other expense that our government is responsible for and must pay. There is nothing the tea party has done but cause harm and insanity to the country when we are recovering from a recession and it is necessary to have funds to pay for our debts. The tea party will hopefully be shown the door come election because legislators have to be smart, reasonable and ready to compromise to get the best solutions. Nothing getting done because of the tea party shows their inability to work for the people they represent or anyone else.

[stevehamilton858]

the only thing that the House vote is symbolic of is Republican stupidity. These jamokes have no idea what kind of explosives they are playing with. They have no idea how damaging and expensive it would be if the US Government defaulted on legal obligations. We would have a credit rating several stages lower that that of Greece, or Italy. Life as we know it today (or even prior to 2008)would be crippled for decades. These House loonies are dangerous because they're so uneducated and unintelligent. I hope they get thrown out wholesale before the end of the year.

[stevehamilton858]

realtimecoffee. The US Government has contractual liabilities that need to be paid. If they are not paid then the US Government would default on its legal obligations. What do you think would happen to our credit rating if the US defaulted? How much more in interest on our borrowings do you think we would have to pay? The answer is hundreds of billions. And who would pay for those extra hundreds of billions in extra interest? The answer is all US taxpayers - individuals and corporations. If you think the current recession is bad, it would look like the good old days, if we ever defaulted on our legal, contractual liabilities.

[washmohickory]

When is the government going to stop borrowing to pay it's debt? Do you do that? Here's a thought - quit spending somewhere. You would think this government would adopt plans to stop this slide. But the bills that come out of the House just go into never never land with this Democratic controlled Senate. Hopefully, the tea party will have candidates in the Senate that will win and then the President will be forced to back up his words about debt reduction.

[Dgunner]

I firmly believe that it doesn't make any difference who or from what party is president. The US is somuch debt and continues to dig a deeper hole that no one party or any one grand idea is going to change much if we had a sudden increase in jobs and industry it would take hundred years to get out debt and our great grand children will will still be paying the debt we build in this century.The politicalmachine will not or can't work together and until that division is closed we will continue to commit financial suicide.

[stevehamilton858]

I don't think you have any idea what you are talking about. Why do you think it would take 100 years to pay down our debt if the economy recovered and hiring continued to improve? You might be right, I suppose if we only hired 10,000 new people per month. My sense is you probably didn't do too well in math when you were in school.

You are correct however, in saying that the overall situation won't improve until elected officials from the two parties start working together. this means that the country needs more centrists; elected officials like Eisenhower, or even LBJ. However, if you read the news about the CPAC conference, you will see that the Republicans think that what they have to do is move further to the right. I was a solid Republican voter for over 50 years, and I am sickened by what has happened to this once great party. The list of presidential candidates served up by the RNC is pitiful. You couldn't waterboard me into voting for any one of them; Romney has the best chance of beating the sitting president, except for the fact that he will be rejected by the evangelist element of the GOP, which is probably the most bigoted, organized group in America today. If the GOP doesn't get its act together soon and start focusing on how to improve the economy and restoring middle income jobs, it will lose by a landslide larger than Goldwater's loss in 1964. The first priority item for the party is to disentangle itself from the Tea Party and Americans for Tax Reform. The next priority is to figure out how to vett decent candidates who are "conservative leaning centrists", which is what Dwight Eisenhower, The best GOP president of the 20th century, was. If they don't recover control of the party from the wingnuts, they are on a path to irrelevance.

[nd1016]

After two massive wars not accounted for, tax break which was supposed to increase employment and more revenue was a mirage. Prescription drug plan not paid for.

We have spend all the money. Now pay for it. and stop whinning.

If you want to cut other government programs which were accounted for, look at Defense. But no, cant touch it. Need more money for guns and bullets. Got to go for another war to save Israel from the Muslims.

[stevehamilton858]

I agree with part of what you say, but you're missing one important element in your thinking, and that is something any experienced businessman knows, which is this: the best way to get out of a negative cash flow situation is to figure out a way to grow the business. Focus somewhat on reducing costs, but do not think you can slash your way back to positive cash flow through reductions in costs only. Our Congress does not understand this basic business principle. If they did, both parties would move towards the center and develop a multi-faceted plan to grow our economy and repatriate jobs to the US. Instead, we get rhetoric and demagoguery from the wingnuts.

And about Defense spending - you're going to be happy that our military is as strong as it is when Israel attacks Iran to prevent them from completing one or more nuclear weapons in super-safe facilities. I think that the Anti-Federalists who misname themselves the Tea Party, have done more damage to this country than Osama bin Laden. With their incessant focus on reducing the size of the Federal Government, they are killing America's chance to compete in the coming years. Two of the former GOP presidential candidates, in pandering to the Tea Party, wanted to abolish the Department of Education - how myopic is that?

[freedom8246]

It makes no differeance whether there Republicans or democrates or conservitives or liberals Everyone from washington Dc to Wall Street to Main Street where caught with thier greedy little fingers in the cash register Draw in 2009 and everyone is blaming everyone else. Dale BenningtonViet Nam Vet
spring Hill Fl. 34608

1 352 340 5852 Why because they dont know how to fix it by themselves

[freedom8246]

It makes no differeance whether there Republicans or democrates or conservitives or liberals Everyone from washington Dc to Wall Street to Main Street where caught with thier greedy little fingers in the cash register Draw in 2009 and everyone is blaming everyone else. Dale BenningtonViet Nam Vet
spring Hill Fl. 34608

1 352 340 5852 Why because they dont know how to fix it by themselves

[gep1955]

$1.2 trillion is 1,200 billion bucks folks of your and my tax money that we work 40-100 hours a week for. Much of it goes to support entitlements to 48% of Americans that pay zero taxes. But if we fuss about it they call us greedy. And the liberals keep demanding more. In Nov 2012 the democrats will be less than 20% of all seats in both houses. Count on it.

[stevehamilton858]

Your 20% figure is right, but you have it tagged to the wrong party. Republicans will lose the presidential election by a margin greater than when Johnson beat Goldwater. And there are enough Americans beginning to realize that most of the debt increase is caused by liabilities that George Bush incurred, and now all we're doing is paying for them. Why are the Republicans in the House screwing around with a "symbolic" vote? Why don't they comport with their oath of office and do what's best for the country. The US Government has contractual liabilities that need to be paid, and it will have to borrow more money to pay them. The alternative would be for the US to default on its obligations, which would drive our credit rating down close to junk bond status. Think about how many hundreds of billions in higher interest that would cost the US, and that would require a massive tax hike on everyone; the rich, the poor, the middle class, every business in the country. The currently elected Republican representatives are callow and incompetent. the Tea Party freshmen don't even understand how laws get made in this country, nor what it means to negotiate. Why are the House Republicans again raising the issue of uncertainty in the minds of the credit rating agencies? What possible good do they think will come of this "symbolic" vote? It will be good for the Democrats, but cost Republicans millions of votes from Independents or Centrists, even Conservative leaning Centrists. That's why you've assigned the 20% figure to the wrong party. Remember, Lincoln said, "you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time". The currently elected GOP legislators have fooled too many of the people too much of the time - but it's going to end in November 2012. There will be a huge pool of GOP ex-legislators seeking to become lobbyists in early 2013.

[stevehamilton858]

You have a really bad data source. Why do you think that entitlements go to citizens who don't pay taxes? I am 78 and live on a small Social Security pension that I paid into for over 50 years,and I pay my taxes, as I have every year since 1955.

[antoniof123]

More Republican retroic, just a dog and pony show again.

I am getting sick of the worst congress lead by bone head in histroy.

[Tired_of_liars]

Well the Democrats are no better. And that is FACT. And the name for you morons who can't figure it out, is BOEHNER

[stevehamilton858]

I agree. When I grew up, which was a long time ago, a "boner" was two things: something that an aroused male had, and a really stupid mistake. I notice that the Speaker has tried to change the pronunciation of his name to "Bainer". I think that's been about as successful as W's "enhanced interrogation", as though nobody would notice that it was still torture. "Boner" it is and "Boner" it will be, and boners are what he makes.

[tx-wheels]

As I read the article I thought, nothing news worthy here. Just more business as usual in DC.
To my thinking business in DC has purposely become, how can we best screw the American people on this fine day??.

If you're tired of DC's BS, let's send them a real message. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zYh0RsCXys