Why Do Congressional Appropriation Bills Have to Be Approved Twice

 

Why Do Congressional Appropriation Bills Have to Be Approved Twice?

Both an Initial Vote and a Debt Ceiling Vote

OK, Congress decided to pass the debt ceiling, but dour-faced Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) pledged Republican resistance to raising it again when that issue comes up for a vote again on December 3rd. In the meantime, the Democrats are likely to pass some version of a BuiId It Back Better additional infrastructure legislation, through the budget reconciliation process which is not subject to the 60-vote Senate filibuster/cloture rule which is required to bring most bills to a floor vote. This could well result in a corporate tax increase, perhaps higher rates on very highly compensated individuals, and perhaps incur a hit to the deficit. The bill currently contemplated will cover expenditures over decade, although a smaller sum expended over a shorter time is possible. 

GOP deficit hawks, who had no problem passing a deficit-busting corporate mega-tax cut in 2017, are screaming. But their tax decrease added trillions of dollars of deficits for a program that did not, as promised, remotely pay for itself. If the GOP couldn’t stop the infrastructure bill once, they are hell bent at a second chance to effectively repeal that bill by defunding it… and the nation.

We are indeed the only democracy in the world where a majority of our legislature – Congress – is generally insufficient to pass a bill. So, when our legislature passes an appropriation bill, and the President signs it into law, shouldn’t that be it? Shouldn’t that automatically be deemed to be an approved expenditure, whether it is currently funded or adds to the deficit. But no; we have an archaic system that gives Congress a second bite at repealing appropriation legislation that was duly passed and signed into law: a vote on our debt ceiling. 

A “no vote” defunds the national debt, puts the United States into potential default to creditors all over the world, and decimates our financial credibility. Even the threat of a “no” vote has consequences. It is a deeply destabilizing threat. Former Fed Chair and current Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has told us (on CNN): “It’s led to a series of politically dangerous conflicts that have caused Americans and global markets to question whether or not America is serious about paying its bills.” The United States constantly hangs in a dangerous limbo, where a misstep could easily trigger a recession and even encourage other nations to denigrate our dollar as a major reserve currency.

If there is a necessity to address aggregate borrowing limits, it just might be easier to require bills to carry a Congressional Budget Office impact assessment on the deficit. Linking spending with borrowing. But undoing passed bills and threatening to bring the nation into a crippling default is insane. It’s as if a consumer can run up a credit card debt but refuse to pay when the monthly invoice becomes due. It’s just a tad worse when the debtor is the United States. We are indeed severely polarized, but this double bite at the apple makes our Congress seem a whole lot more like a drunken assembly of Keystone Cops rather than a responsible governing body. 

The Los Angeles Times (October 11th) opines: “Congress established the debt limit more than a century ago. In theory, it is supposed to encourage fiscally responsible behavior. In practice, the debt limit is largely ignored until the U.S. hits it. That’s why the current version makes no sense. The debt limit doesn’t actually stop Congress from running up debts. It merely stops the Treasury from borrowing the funds needed to pay federal creditors, pensioners, investors and others to whom Uncle Sam owes money.

“The debt limit is an irresponsible way to manage the nation’s obligations, and it’s time to get rid of it… There is a value in having some mechanism to constrain spending, or at least force a meaningful debate over whether the expense justifies the debt. Over the years, there have been countless proposals to reform or replace the debt limit…

“The semi-regular debt limit fight is politics at its worst. Why? Because raising the federal debt limit should be a routine, obligatory act by Congress to fulfill the government’s basic duty to pay the bills run up by the very same Congress.

“Instead, the debt limit has become a prop in Washington’s Political Kabuki Theater. One party — usually the GOP — refuses to vote to raise the debt limit, while bemoaning the amount of federal spending and the size of the deficit. The other party scrambles for strategies or concessions to get the votes. While the standoff plays out, the U.S. inches closer to the moment when it runs out of cash and can no longer borrow to meet its financial obligations, which include Social Security payments and reimbursing hospitals for Medicare patients.” Our country and our economy are not a big “I gotch ya” game. Real lives are at stake. It’s time to grow up and act like adults. Change is mandatory. We need to stop this lose-lose self-destructive practice.

I’m Peter Dekom, and I agree with the LA Times that “the best course for Congress is to repeal the debt limit and put an end to this dangerous brinkmanship.”