The Fight Over the Debt Ceiling Is Just Beginning
Legislators will increasingly argue over how to spend a diminishing discretionary budget while overall spending simultaneously explodes.

People are uneasy about the debt ceiling fight. Many think it's unhealthy and a sign of poor fiscal management, and they are right. However, they should get used to it. These budget fights will keep getting more frequent and more intense. That's because no one wants to talk about budget restraints. The truth is that existing spending commitments are rapidly shrinking the share of the budget that politicians have control over as their appetite for spending expands.
Those who believe that government is the answer to all problems are always full of ideas about new programs to be funded. They want to prepare for the next pandemic or emergency by funding new government capabilities. They want government to engineer an energy revolution while simultaneously paying off all outstanding student loans as well as all future enrollments. They also want the government to relieve parents of the financial burden of raising children, while expanding the military and funding every project on the books.
Legislators will likely succeed in passing some bills and take at least tiny steps toward funding some of these grand policy projects. But I wouldn't count on the completion of any of them—and that's not just because the government usually fails to deliver on its loftier goals. Rather, it's because these ambitious objectives will mostly have to be funded from the discretionary part of the federal budget, which is melting away.
Indeed, the discretionary budget is what pays for homeland security, most of the military, farm subsidies, education, and much more. It's the only part of the budget legislators directly and regularly control. Today, discretionary spending accounts for 30 percent of total spending. In 1970, it was 62 percent. Defense spending is about half of it and 14 percent of the total budget.
By contrast, the amount spent on non-discretionary programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid has doubled as a portion of total spending, from 31 percent of the budget in 1970 to around 62 percent in 2023.
Meanwhile, interest payments on the national debt are another fast-growing mandatory-spending component of the federal budget. Altogether, mandatory spending on entitlements and interest payments accounts for over 70 percent of the budget and is projected to consume more than 80 percent by 2040. Legislators barely have a say over such payments, even though these increasingly dominate the budget.
What's more, many mandatory spending programs are growing even faster than the economy and will therefore rely heavily on borrowing. Above and beyond the debt problems we might face, this reality has serious implications for all those politicians who believe they can fund their new projects or expand existing ones with the discretionary side of the budget. The budgetary turnip is rapidly running out of blood.
So expect more intense budgetary battles. While discretionary spending is still growing in nominal terms, albeit at a slowed rate, legislators will increasingly fight over how to spend this constantly diminishing budget while overall spending is simultaneously exploding. There won't be much room politically to grow discretionary spending out of borrowed money. And with fewer dollars to go around, competition for each one of them will become increasingly fierce.
In that battle, it won't matter that, for example, defense is a legit function of the federal government while education should be funded at the state, local, and private levels—or even that some new program is truly worthwhile. It will matter more which party is in power and which politicians are positioned to allocate funds where they want them to go.
Of course, with our debt and deficit growing, legislators will try to collect more taxes. If they succeed, the revenue will be a drop in the bucket full of mandatory red ink. However, I predict that their effort will fail.
A look at the data shows that no matter the federal tax rates under the current regime, since the 1940s, collections have never been more than 20 percent of GDP. That's in part because politicians are pressured to redistribute lots of resources back to taxpayers through the tax code with provisions like the child tax credit and other deductions. Adding to the difficulty is the fact that higher marginal tax rates slow the economy and eventually limit the scope of tax collections as Americans make less money.
If you're tired of debt ceiling fights, I'm sorry to report that they're just the beginning of a long series of fights over fiscal management.
COPYRIGHT 2023 CREATORS.COM.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Not to worry. It’s only a hundred years since the climax of the great German Hyperinflation.
Aside from being great for the wheelbarrow industry, one of the effects of the inflation was that both government spending and taxation, while increasing vastly in nominal terms, actually collapsed in real terms – taxation to roughly zero. Accumulated government debt also went to zero.
In 1924 Germany had a fresh fiscal start. A small, balanced, budget and no debt.
You know who else got a fresh start in 1924?
Calvin Coolidge?
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.NETPAYFAST.COM
The Winter Olympics?
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,300 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,200 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
Lee Marvin was born. I bet you’re a big Lee Marvin fan.
Ted Kenedy?
I just saw a big display of wheelbarrows at Lowe's. I wondered what they were for.
They're made out of plastic now, but you don't really need metal to haul stacks of paper around. And they have two front wheels so even people whose arms have atrophied from living in the Metaverse can push them.
No, those guys need to electric ones.
Lil Rascal has a new electric mobility scooter model for the full-time internet pontificators to haul their devalued money around:
The Continental
The model for the EU will be called the Weimar.
Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it what I do…..
For more detail visit the given link……….>>> http://Www.jobsrevenue.com
Guys living in the metaverse probably have at least one working arm that gets some exercise.
Japan is our future not Germany.
If we don't default on the debt it's Japan.
If we default on the debt and keep deficit spending, then it's Germany.
If we default on the debt and then live within our means, then it's jubilee
1924 was the Dawes Plan. That's what ended the hyperinflation and reset the reparations debt. But we're not going to default on our debt. Better by our reckoning to enslave our kids
I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it's my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart
OPEN>> http://WWW.DAILYPRO7.COM
I am a billionaire. Literally. I have two $500,000,000 notes from Zimbabwe.
It wasn't just Germany and wasn't just the 1920s.
A recent discussion I ran across (was in on Nick's podcast?) talked briefly about why Argentina tolerates such high inflation. Not hyperinflation by definition, but high enough that even Biden would panic. The answer is that the government is in power because of high spending, and cutting back on spending would toss them out of office. And that inflationary spending goes to special interests first that keep them in office. Unions for example. (Reminds me of California).
Hyperinflation is about defaulting on debt and continuing to spend. Germany, Zimbabwe, Latin America
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK. 🙂
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.SALARYBEZ.COM
So cut spending and let the debt ceiling serve as… a ceiling on the debt.
Just 5 years ago the federal budget was 4 trillion dollars per year. Thanks to Trump and COVID panic, that shot up to 6 trillion dollars. Which Biden promptly took as the new baseline. Congress is spending 50% more than they were in 2018, when the government was already way too big.
So take the 33% budget axe and get to work. Cutting back to 2018 levels would balance the budget right away. We somehow managed to survive with the Feds spending "only" 4 trillion a year, we'll manage again.
Taking it one step further...would it be the end of the world as we know it if discretionary spending (not SSA, Mcaid, Mcare) was rolled back to 2016 levels? I highly doubt it.
That solution would still leave $32 trillion of debt to future generations.
Well then, how about some more inflation?
Do not raise the debt limit but instead set a requirement of reducing it by $1T per year.
Living below one’s means is the correct path.
Racist!
*clubs a gay baby seal for Jesus* Yup
Those who believe that government is the answer to all problems are always full of ideas about new programs to be funded.
Legislators are elected on promises to expand government spending. Nobody wants a caretaker government that promises to fix the potholes, they want an expansive government that promises to build new roads.
Your words ring true. No politician ever got elected by promising to take care of things as they are now. It is always more and that will always cost more.
"Nobody wants a caretaker government that promises to fix the potholes"
Not nobody. I want that.
And is that reflected in your votes?
There's no such thing as "mandatory spending". That's a term politicians use to make it sound like they have no choice. In fact, the feds can pass legislation to cut or eliminate that spending any time they want to.
Absolutely. Mandatory spending is just spending they already promised to spend. It literally takes an act of congress to change, but they are, indeed, congress itself. Will be political fallout, but better that than runaway inflation as we keep bumping up our spending by multiple trillions every couple of years.
Been there, done that. At this point, Republicans have rolled over on the debt ceiling so many times and so consistently that they can't be considered any less complicit than Democrats. There is no serious willpower in Washington to cut spending, mostly because there is no serious willpower anywhere in America to cut spending. The best you will get is "We can save money by cutting insignificantly small stuff I don't like." but no politician is going to touch the political third rail of entitlement spending with a ten foot pole.
It will remain this way until America defaults. It's a matter of when, not if. Gravity will eventually reassert itself and the very same people will be left wondering "How could this have happened? How did no one see it?" just the same way that they always have.
Why should they fight when everytime they do they are attacked by leftists and their supporters (like Reason & other left libertarians) for wanting to murder people. They are are not an ally in getting govt spending under control but a concern troll egging their opponent into taking untenable positions before betraying them.
The science changed!
I still run across people who claim we can balance the budget and still have money leftover if we just cut all foreign aid. But the numbers show that foreign aid is fraction of a drop in the pig trough. It's inconsequential.
Yeah we shoudl cut foreign aid. But we also should eliminate sugar subsidies and take a damned hard look at farm subsidies (at the same time we still destroy crops to keep prices up). Maybe cut subsidies to petroleum industry, but Red Texas won't allow it. I haven't even gotten started on defense spending, social spending, etc. Means test social security and medicare. Etc., etc. Yada, yada, yada.
If all the Republicans can't find anything significant to cut, they ain't looking. If they're going to have a showdown over the debt limit, at least have ti be a showdown over some actual spending cuts.
If they’re going to have a showdown over the debt limit, at least have ti be a showdown over some actual spending cuts.
Nope. It'll be a total capitulation. They will stamp their feet and screech on Fox News, but despite controlling the House they will roll over completely, 100%, just like they have done so every time before. Just watch.
What "subsidies"? The US government does not hand out any significant amount of money to oil companies as far as I know.
It does grant about $20 billion total in tax breaks to oil companies, but those largely correspond to tax breaks available to other industries as well and mostly account for expenses.
This is how any cutting to the economy is treated by Democrats and Journalismists, writ large..
It's been that way my entire life.
De Rugy says nice things about immigrants and mean things about Trump. Therefore this article is wrong.
Poor sarc. Been quite the bad last few days for you. It'll get better.
Just eliminate any cabinet department where you cannot point to a specific constitutional authorization.
Dept of defense, in there.
Dept of education, not so much.
Etc.
Not just the departments, but their budgets as well. No good getting rid of the departments when all that will happens is shifting the budget over to other departments.
Here’s a suggestion:
- hold national elections for the heads of cabinet departments, not just the president; make cabinet department heads independent of the directions of the president
- force Congress to agree on a total budget first (ideally, with a balanced budget requirement)
- then have a vote on the budget for each cabinet department separately, no ability to horse trade, no ability to attach anything else
This would not just encourage better budgeting, it would also limit the power of the imperial presidency.
Home earnings allow all people to paint on-line and acquire weekly bills to financial institutions. Earn over $500 each day and get payouts each week instantly to account for financial institutions. (bwj-03) My remaining month of earnings was $30,390 and all I do is paint for as much as four hours an afternoon on my computer. Easy paintings and constant earnings are exquisite with this job.
More information→→→→→ https://WWW.DAILYPRO7.COM
I'm beginning to think "debt ceiling" is just another made up political term without real meaning, like "assault rifle".
I'm not particularly tired of spending fights. What I'm tired of is that politicians almost never get punished by the voters for their irresponsibility. Until third parties have a place at the table it will not and cannot change. If ten percent of the Representatives in Congress representing the ten percent of Libertarians voters in the US got to vote against both the Democratic Party spending wish-list AND against the Republican Party spending wish-list and could trade debt limit reductions and spending reductions for the most important constitutionally-mandated Federal spending, things would finally change. Long past time to end the two-party election system.
"Those who believe that government is the answer to all problems are always full of ideas about new programs to be funded."
And those who believe this never give a thought to cost and where the funding might come from.
c'mon, "The Rich!" have a literal unlimited supply of money to fund anything /s
As I have suggested before, the problem is Americans are undertaxed for the services they receive. Were taxes set at an appropriate level for the services, people would be incentivized to consider the value of the service. As it now people get services cheap so why question the cost. After all I will likely be dead before the bill comes due.
Specifically, in order to pay for our social welfare state, taxes would have to rise greatly on the middle class and we would need a national sales tax of about 20% on top of that. That’s how Europe finances its social welfare state, and even they still run some deficits and still charge separately for healthcare and retirement.
As I have suggested before, the problem is Americans are undertaxed for the services they receive
And underserved in relation to the spending that's occurring.
Maybe underserved but it is not questioned because it is priced artificially low. Again, if Americans paid the true cost, I would expect both cuts in services and a demand to get what is paid for in the remaining services.
“…., people would be incentivized to consider the value of the service…..”
If we were all taxed the same amount. Not rate, amount. Tolerance for government bloat would disappear overnight with 300 million auditors that have skin in the game.
Fuck you, cut spending.
I'm fine with whatever the outcome is as long as the GOP doesn't force a shutdown of the government.
Work for 2-3 hours in your spare time and get paid $1000 on your bank account every Make everyone ( £26,000 __ £38,000 ) A Month Online Making nb money online more than £20k just by doing simple work With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss And for more info visit any tab this site
Thanks a lot just.Open this link……………>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
Wow, it sure takes a highly paid academic to have such profound insights! Next you'll tell us that water is wet!
Freeze the budget for ten years. No baseline budgeting. Just freeze it. Even for three years. Every department gets the same amount of money as they got the year before. Total tax receipts will go up with inflation, but spending will not. It's a mathematical certainty that revenue will meet spending. And there you have it. A balanced budget.
You're still proposing solutions which have been roundly derided in the media as "literally killing grandma".
Departments get the same amount of money. So Social Security has to make due with the same funding as the previous year. Maybe it would force some means testing. Yeah it amounts to punishing people who planned ahead, but there's really no better way.
No democrat will ever allow that.
But the media will portray a reduction on the rate of increase (all we've really ever seen in any of our lifetimes) as "draconian cuts" set to "starve grandma" and "kill children".
Then someone needs to respond with reality.
Which brings us back to they don't want to elect reality. They want to elect someone who promises more.
""Freeze the budget for ten years. ""
Good luck with that, they couldn't even handle sequestration.
The ugly truth is this, budget constraint is a political loser for the GOP. And making the general public pay for the outlandish spending the Democrats have convinced them they're entitled to is also politically unpalatable. The Democrats' proposed solution, taxing the rich, is a stupid joke. There simply isn't enough money there to pay for their idiocy. For all intents and purposes, as terrible as I think it is, the Democrats have effectively won the budget war.
The only real option I can see for the GOP is to give the Democrats their way. Good and hard. Sign off on Bernie and Fauxcahantas's financial contract transaction tax. Let the Democrats' allies on Wall Street get a nice long taste of exactly what it is they're supporting. Make endowment income fully taxable. They're rich. The universities can well pay out a little bit of their investment returns. Place an excise tax on the entertainment industry, including social media. Why should millionaire actors and "social media influencers" not have to pay their "fair share". Add on fees for private aviation. Hey, those things are contributing to global warming. The least they can do is pay up.
Starting to think the same. Bring on the wealth tax, let them get a nice big delicious taste of the political party they support. Tax the rich- it follows anywhere on the planet there’s a hideout bunker. They hated Trump, still do, wanted Biden - -they got him.
You cannot tax people rich enough to own a Congressman. You can merely make a show of taxing them to distract the media from the middle-class that is really paying.
Couldn't a case be made that debt ceiling is unconstitutional? The 14th amendment says, 'the full faith and credit of the United States shall not be questioned. ..."
I think there's something in the Constitution that says politicians and bureaucrats can do whatever they want and the public is on the hook for it.
The "full faith and credit" clause means the federal government has to pay its debts. It says nothing about running up more debt.
If you are trying to argue that the federal government has to borrow to make debt payments:
1) That’s covering up bankruptcy with a Ponzi scheme. When an individual borrows to make loan payments, he goes to prison.
2) It’s not true (yet). This clause may require slashing other pay-outs to free up money to make debt payments, but it certainly doesn’t authorize borrowing to make debt payments while continuing to fully fund welfare and drug war agencies, or even the DOD and Social Security.