Biden, Joseph R Jr

More stories

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    McCarthy Renews Call for Spending Cuts as Debt Talks Grind On

    by

    With a potential default just over a week away, a resolution remained elusive and Republican leaders told lawmakers they could return home for the holiday break.With a potential federal default just over a week away, a resolution to the debt limit crisis remained out of reach on Wednesday as White House and top Republican negotiators reported no breakthrough in another marathon day of discussions and members of Congress prepared to leave the capital for the holiday weekend.Negotiators met for roughly four hours on Wednesday afternoon at the White House and were silent upon leaving, which some regarded as a hopeful sign after days of public posturing from both sides. Representative Patrick T. McHenry, Republican of North Carolina and a key bargainer, rushed past reporters at the Capitol saying: “No news.”Speaker Kevin McCarthy stayed uncharacteristically close-lipped after the meeting ended, leaving the Capitol on Wednesday night without speaking to reporters. But he expressed cautious optimism, telling Fox Business that “things are going a little better.”“I think today they would say they’re making progress,” Mr. McCarthy said of the negotiators.With no deal imminent, Republican leaders told lawmakers they were free to return home for the Memorial Day weekend, but could be summoned back on short notice to vote. The announcement made clear that Mr. McCarthy and his deputies did not expect a resolution to avert a default to materialize until next week, just days from the projected June 1 deadline.At the same time, the speaker sought to reassure the markets that a deal could be reached.“I would not, if I was in the markets, be afraid of anything in this process,” he said. “I wouldn’t scare the markets in any shape or form. We will come to an agreement worthy of the American public, and there should not be any fear. Money is coming in every day.”Before the meeting, Mr. McCarthy sought to pressure President Biden and congressional Democrats to accept spending cuts to domestic programs in exchange for raising the debt limit and allowing the Treasury Department to avoid missing payments.“You have to spend less than you spent last year,” Mr. McCarthy said at a news conference in the Capitol as Biden administration and Republican negotiators gathered at the White House. “That is not that difficult to do. But in Washington, somehow that is a problem.”The administration has resisted cuts and instead pushed for a freeze on current spending levels. With Republicans insisting there be no cuts to defense or veterans’ programs, the brunt of the reductions would affect social programs that Democrats favor.Right-wing Republicans have vowed to oppose any compromise that retreats from cuts that were part of their debt-limit bill, which was approved last month along party lines, so Mr. McCarthy is likely to need a substantial number of Democratic votes to pass any agreement. But congressional Democrats are resisting cuts in the overall budget.Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington, the chairwoman of the Progressive Caucus, said at a news conference that White House officials told her on Tuesday night that House G.O.P. negotiators had rejected proposals that could have reduced the deficit by $3 trillion, including closing tax loopholes and imposing new taxes on the highest earners. Mr. McCarthy has repeatedly said that Republicans will not accept any tax increases.“We will continue to call out and reject this reckless hostage-taking from extreme MAGA Republicans,” Ms. Jayapal said.In an effort to pressure Mr. McCarthy and other Republicans not to accept any deal that falls short of the House-passed bill, Representative Chip Roy of Texas, an influential hard-liner, released a memo asserting that every measure in the legislation was “critical.”“None should be abandoned solely for the quest of a ‘deal’,” Mr. Roy wrote.Many Democrats, too, were arguing against any compromise. Their leaders announced on Wednesday that the final two members of their caucus had signed a discharge petition aimed at bypassing Republican leaders and forcing debt-limit legislation to the floor. With their 213 signatures, Democrats would need at least five Republicans to break ranks and sign the petition for it to trigger such a vote. Democratic leaders called on Republicans to show that they are not allied with the most extreme wing of their party and help advance the petition to avert an economic catastrophe.“It does appear increasingly likely that House Republicans want a dangerous default, they want to crash the economy and they want to trigger a job-killing recession,” said Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York and the minority leader. “It’s my hope that five Republicans from New York or California or other moderate districts throughout the country can prove me wrong.”The House is set to begin a weeklong Memorial Day recess on Friday. Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 2 Republican, advised lawmakers on Wednesday night that they should be prepared to return to the Capitol within 24 hours to approve a compromise bill. Mr. McCarthy has vowed to give lawmakers 72 hours to review any plan.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen has warned repeatedly that the government could exhaust its ability to meet all of its obligations by June 1. More

  • 125 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Potential Debt Ceiling Deal Would Barely Change Federal Spending Path

    by

    Negotiators have focused on a relatively small corner of the budget, shunning new revenues or cuts to the fastest-growing programsAs their debt limit negotiations with President Biden push the nation perilously close to a devastating default, House Republicans have stuck to a clear message: They must force a change in what they call the nation’s “unsustainable” spending path.Yet in talks with Mr. Biden, Speaker Kevin McCarthy and his lieutenants have focused almost entirely on cutting a small corner of the budget — known as nondefense discretionary spending — that includes funding for education, environmental protection, national parks, domestic law enforcement and other areas. That budget line accounts for less than 15 percent of the $6.3 trillion the government is expected to spend this year. It is not outsized, by historical standards. It is already projected to shrink, as a share of the economy, over the next decade.And it has nothing to do with the big drivers of projected spending growth in the coming years: the safety-net programs Social Security and Medicare, which are facing increasingly large payouts as the American population ages.Those politically popular programs have been deemed off limits in the current talks by Republicans, who came under heavy criticism from Mr. Biden for even entertaining changes that could raise the retirement age for those programs or make other changes to slow their future spending.Republicans have also refused to entertain cuts to military spending, which is nearly as large as nondefense discretionary spending. As a result, the negotiations are almost certain not to produce any agreement with Mr. Biden that would dramatically alter the course of federal spending in the next decade.Instead, they would concentrate budget cuts on education, environmental protection and a host of other government services that fiscal experts say are nowhere close to being primary sources of spending growth in the years to come.For instance, if Republicans could somehow persuade Mr. Biden to accept the full round of discretionary spending cuts contained in the fiscal bill the House passed last month, it would do little to alter the nation’s overall spending trajectory over the next decade. Those cuts would reduce federal spending by about $470 billion in 2033 and likely save about $100 billion that year in borrowing costs, according to the Congressional Budget Office.Total government spending would then be just under 24 percent of the economy — or nearly exactly what it is today.While those cuts might not make much of a dent in the overall budget, they would still be felt by many Americans. Because the cuts would be so contained to one segment, many popular government programs would shrink by as much as 30 percent under that scenario, White House officials and independent analysts have calculated.“The cuts Republicans propose would have severe impacts on education, public safety, child care, veterans’ health care and more,” the White House budget director, Shalanda Young, wrote in a memo last week.Republicans have for months cited growing federal spending and debt as the reason they have refused to raise the nation’s borrowing limit — risking default — unless Mr. Biden agrees to spending cuts.Representative Garret Graves of Louisiana, one of Mr. McCarthy’s top negotiators, said this week that the biggest gap with Biden administration officials was on spending numbers. “My interpretation of their position is that they fail to recognize or fail to see to the fact that we are on a spending trajectory right now that is absolutely unsustainable,” he said.Federal spending spiked during the Covid-19 pandemic, first under President Donald J. Trump and continuing under Mr. Biden, as lawmakers delivered trillions of dollars in assistance to businesses, people and state and local governments. It remains higher than historical norms, when measured as a share of the economy, which is the easiest way to track spending patterns as prices have increased over time.The Congressional Budget Office estimates that total spending averaged just under 21 percent of gross domestic product from 1980 through 2019, just before the pandemic hit. It surged above 30 percent in 2020 and 2021. This fiscal year, it is expected to be just over 24 percent, falling slightly over the next several years and then beginning to grow again in the waning years of this decade, climbing past 25 percent in 2033.Discretionary spending, though, is expected to decline over the decade as a share of the economy. Military spending — which Republicans have thus far refused to reduce as part of talks with Mr. Biden’s team — should tick down slightly from 3 percent of the economy. Discretionary spending outside the military is now 3.6 percent but is expected to fall to 3.2 percent by 2033.Social Security and Medicare, conversely, are expected to grow rapidly over the next 10 years, as retiring baby boomers qualify to receive health and retirement benefits. Social Security spending will rise from 4.8 percent to 6 percent of the economy in that time, the budget office projects, and Medicare will rise from 3.9 percent to 5.3 percent.Analysts say those programs are the primary reason budget forecasts have long shown federal spending increasing in the coming decades — even before Mr. Biden took office.“The entirety of the overall federal spending increase relative to G.D.P. over the long term can be accounted for by the growth in the major federal health programs (Medicare, Medicaid, and the A.C.A.) and Social Security,” Charles P. Blahous, who studies federal spending and debt at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, told the Senate Budget Committee this month in written testimony.Conservative groups have criticized Republicans for not including the safety-net programs in debt demands. “While current debt ceiling negotiations largely concern ways to restrain the discretionary parts of the budget, any serious proposal to tackle the emerging debt and deficit crisis must also address our largest mandatory spending programs: Social Security and Medicare,” Alex Durante, an economist at the Tax Foundation, which promotes lower taxes, wrote on Wednesday.Liberal groups and the White House have criticized Mr. McCarthy and his team for neglecting the other side of the fiscal ledger: the nation’s tax system. Tax receipts briefly surged last year but are expected to fall back toward historical norms this year, stabilizing around 18 percent of the economy, the budget office projects. Mr. McCarthy has cited last year’s numbers to incorrectly claim current tax revenues are near record highs. More

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Biden and McCarthy Describe ‘Productive’ Debt Limit Talks, but No Deal Is Reached

    by

    President Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy expressed optimism on Monday that they could break the partisan stalemate that has prevented action to avert a default on the nation’s debt, but remained far apart on a deal to raise the debt limit as Democrats resisted Republicans’ demands for spending cuts in exchange.The two met face to face at the White House for the second time in two weeks in a show of good will after a weekend of behind-the-scenes clashes among negotiators, punctuated by a move by Republicans on Friday to halt the talks and accusations by both sides that the other was being unreasonable.With Mr. Biden back from a summit meeting in Japan, the tenor appeared to have changed considerably. “We don’t have an agreement yet,” Mr. McCarthy told reporters at the White House after the meeting. “But I did feel like the discussion was productive,” he said, adding later that he believed the tone of the talks was “better than any other time we’ve had discussions.”“I believe we can still get there,” Mr. McCarthy said. “I believe we can get it done.”He said he expected to speak with Mr. Biden daily until a deal could be struck.With a default looming as soon as June 1, both Mr. Biden and Mr. McCarthy began their latest meeting sounding upbeat about finding common ground in an effort to avoid economic catastrophe and left dispatching their top advisers to hammer out an agreement in the coming days.“We still have some disagreements, but I think we may be able to get where we have to go,” Mr. Biden said as the two sat down in the Oval Office. “We both know we have a significant responsibility.”Mr. Biden said in a brief statement after the meeting that the talks were “productive.”“We reiterated once again that default is off the table and the only way to move forward is in good faith toward a bipartisan agreement,” he added, saying that he and his negotiating team would continue talking with Mr. McCarthy and his.Still, the two sides remained at loggerheads. The White House has called Republicans’ demands for spending cuts extreme, while Mr. McCarthy and his aides have accused White House officials of being unreasonable.The number of legislative days for Congress to vote to raise the debt ceiling before the projected deadline is rapidly dwindling. Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen on Monday reiterated her warning to Congress that the United States could exceed its authority to borrow to pay its bills as soon as June 1. She said in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” over the weekend that the odds of the government being able to hold out until mid-June — when a substantial amount of quarterly tax revenue is expected to roll in, giving the Treasury more breathing room to cover its obligations — were “quite low.”And Republicans hinted that no deal was likely to materialize until a default was truly imminent. When asked on Monday evening what it would take to break the deadlock, Mr. McCarthy replied simply: “June 1.”Chief among the outstanding issues is how much to spend overall next fiscal year on discretionary programs and how long any spending caps should be in place. Republicans want to allow military spending to increase while cutting other programs. But they have shown some flexibility around how long they would seek to cap spending overall, coming down from their initial demand of a decade to six years.That is longer than Mr. Biden wants. White House officials have proposed holding both military and other spending — which includes education, scientific research and environmental protection — constant over the next two years.“These are tough issues,” said Representative Patrick T. McHenry, Republican of North Carolina and a key ally of Mr. McCarthy who has been involved in the talks and attended the White House meeting. “A directive to cut spending year over year is the toughest thing to do in Washington, D.C. But that is the speaker’s directive to his negotiating team. It is our expectation to be able to get that.”Hard-right members of Mr. McCarthy’s conference have continued to pressure the speaker not to accept anything less than the spending cuts that House Republicans passed in their debt limit bill last month, which would have amounted to a reduction of an average of 18 percent over a decade.“Republicans must #HoldTheLine on the debt ceiling to bring spending back to reality and restore fiscal sanity in DC,” the House Freedom Caucus wrote on Twitter. “We spend $100+ billion more than federal tax revenues EVERY MONTH. Washington has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.”Mr. McCarthy expressed confidence that he could keep his conference largely united around whatever deal he strikes with Mr. Biden, telling reporters at the Capitol before the meeting that he believed it would draw the support of both Democrats and Republicans.“I firmly believe what we’re negotiating right now, a majority of Republicans will see that it is a right place to put us on a right path,” he said.But he also hinted that members of his conference should prepare to accept a final product that falls short of what some lawmakers have demanded.“I don’t want you to think at the end of the day, the bill that we come up with is going to solve all this problem,” he said. “But it’s going to be a step to finally acknowledge our problem and put one step in the right direction. And we’re going to come back the next day and get the next step.”Once negotiators agree to a deal, it will take time to translate it into legislative text. Mr. McCarthy has promised that he will give lawmakers 72 hours to review the bill, and said on Monday that he believed negotiators would need to agree to a compromise this week in order to pass legislation raising the debt ceiling before the projected June 1 deadline.Lawmakers in the House were still left uncertain about when they would need to be present to cast a vote to avert a default. The House, as of Monday evening, was set to depart Washington beginning on Thursday afternoon ahead of the Memorial Day weekend.The two sides have found some agreement in talks in the last week, including on clawing back some unspent funds from previously approved Covid relief legislation.But many other issues have yet to be resolved, including tightening work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents for certain safety social net programs. The bill passed by House Republicans contained stricter requirements for recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and food stamps, and is a key demand of conservatives in the House.Mr. McCarthy said on Monday that he would continue to push for their inclusion in whatever deal he strikes with Mr. Biden, and White House negotiators have shown openness to finding some compromise on the issue.Carl Hulse More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Debt Limit Negotiators Debate Spending Caps to Break Standoff

    by

    The strategy, which was used in 2011, could allow both sides to save face but would most likely do little to chip away at the national debt.As negotiators for the White House and House Republican leaders struggle to reach a deal over how to raise the nation’s debt limit, a solution that harks back to old budget fights has re-emerged as a potential path forward: spending caps.Putting limits on future spending in exchange for raising the $31.4 trillion borrowing cap could be the key to clinching an agreement that would allow Republicans to claim that they secured major concessions from Democrats. It could also allow President Biden to argue that his administration is being fiscally responsible while not caving to Republican demands to roll back any of his primary legislative achievements.The Biden administration and House Republican leaders have agreed in broad terms to some sort of cap on discretionary federal spending for at least the next two years. But they are hung up on the details of those caps, including how much to spend on discretionary programs in the 2024 fiscal year and beyond, and how to divide that spending among the government’s many financial obligations, including the military, veterans affairs, education, health and agriculture.What could a spending cap deal look like?The latest White House offer would hold military and other spending — which includes education, scientific research and environmental protection — constant from the current 2023 fiscal year to next fiscal year, according to a person familiar with both sides’ proposals. That move would not reduce what is known as nominal spending, which simply means the level of spending before adjusting for inflation. Republicans are pushing to cut nominal spending in the first year.One reason the White House is willing to entertain holding spending essentially flat has to do with politics. Given that Republicans control the House, getting an increase in funding for discretionary programs outside the military would have been nearly impossible. Congress would not have approved increases through the appropriations process, the normal way in which Congress allocates money to government programs and agencies.Republicans have repeatedly said that they will not accept a deal unless it results in the government spending less money than it did in the last fiscal year. They have said that simply freezing spending at current levels, as the White House has proposed, does not enact the kind of meaningful cuts many in their party have long called for.But Republican negotiators have shown some flexibility around how long they would require those spending caps to last. House G.O.P. leaders are now looking to set spending caps for six years, rather than 10. Still, that is longer than the White House is proposing, with Democrats offering to cap spending for two years.“The numbers are foundational here,” Representative Garret Graves, Republican of Louisiana and one of Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s lead negotiators, said on Sunday. “The speaker has been very clear: A red line is spending less money and unless and until we’re there, the rest of it is really irrelevant.”The approach is evoking debt limit déjà vu.If spending caps sound familiar, that is because they were employed during the last big debt limit fight in 2011.During that episode of brinkmanship, lawmakers agreed to impose limits on both military and nonmilitary spending from 2012 to 2021. The Budget Control Act caps were somewhat successful at keeping spending in check, but not entirely.A Congressional Research Service report published this year noted that during the decade that the caps were in place, Congress and the president repeatedly enacted laws that increased the spending limits. Certain types of expenditures — for emergencies and military engagements — were exempt from the caps and the federal government spent $2 trillion over 10 years on those programs. And spending on so-called mandatory programs such as Social Security was not capped, and those make up about 70 percent of total government spending.Still, the Congressional Research Service pointed out that spending was lower each year from 2012 to 2019 than had been projected before the caps were put in place.The strategy is no fiscal panacea.Caps that limit spending around current levels will help slow the growth of the nation’s debt, but will not cure the government’s reliance on borrowed money.The Congressional Budget Office said this month that annual deficits — the gap between what America spends and what it earns — are projected to nearly double over the next decade, totaling more than $20 trillion through 2033. That deficit will force the United States to continue to rely heavily on borrowed funds.Marc Goldwein, the senior policy director for the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, estimated that it would require $8 trillion of savings over 10 years to hold the national debt to its current levels. However, he said that did not mean that enacting spending caps would not be worthwhile.“We’re not going to fix this all at once,” Mr. Goldwein said. “So we should do as much as we can, as often as we can.”The group has called for spending caps to be accompanied by spending cuts or tax increases as a plan to reduce the national debt.Spending caps are not the only issue.Finding an agreement on the extent and duration of spending caps will be a critical part of getting a deal.But negotiators are still working to resolve several other issues, including whether to put in place tougher work requirements for social safety net programs including food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Medicaid, and whether to expedite permitting rules for energy projects, two key Republican priorities that White House negotiators have shown some openness to.Jim Tankersley More

  • 138 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Biden and McCarthy Set to Resume Debt Ceiling Talks on Monday

    by

    Discussions aimed at avoiding a default have bogged down as Republicans press their demand for spending caps, work requirements for public benefit programs and other proposals in exchange.President Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy agreed on Sunday to meet on Monday afternoon to try to jump-start talks aimed at averting a default on the nation’s debt, capping a tumultuous stretch of negotiations that faltered over the weekend as the two sides clashed over Republicans’ demands to cut spending in exchange for raising the debt limit.Mr. McCarthy announced the meeting — his third with Mr. Biden this month, scheduled for after the president’s return from the Group of 7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan — after he concluded a call with the president on Sunday sounding more sanguine than before about the prospects for a deal. The speaker said House G.O.P. and White House negotiators would continue talks at the Capitol on Sunday to lay the groundwork. White House negotiators left the Capitol on Sunday night after a two-and-a-half-hour bargaining session with their Republican counterparts but said they intended to keep working before Monday’s session.Mr. Biden “walked through some of the things that he’s still looking at, he’s hearing from his members; I walked through things I’m looking at,” Mr. McCarthy said. “I felt that part was productive. But look — there’s no agreement. We’re still apart.”Negotiators are working against a punishing clock. The debt ceiling, the statutory limit on the government’s power to borrow to pay its obligations, is projected to be reached as soon as June 1.Mr. Biden and Mr. McCarthy are negotiating over a fiscal package that would raise the limit, which Republicans have refused to do without spending cuts. They remain far apart on key issues, including on caps for federal spending, new work requirements for some recipients of federal antipoverty assistance and funding meant to help the I.R.S. crack down on high earners and corporations that evade taxes.Mr. Biden said on Sunday that he believed he had the power to challenge the constitutionality of the nation’s borrowing limit, but that he did not believe such a challenge could succeed in time to avoid a default on federal debt if lawmakers did not raise the limit soon.“I think we have the authority,” Mr. Biden said at a news conference in Hiroshima. “The question is could it be done and invoked in time.”Mr. Biden added that after the current crisis is resolved, he hopes to “find a rationale and take it to the courts” to decide whether the debt limit violates a clause in the 14th Amendment stipulating that the United States must pay its debts. He also said that, while meeting with world leaders, he had not been able to assure them that America would not default on its debt — an event that economists say could set off a financial crisis that would sweep the globe.“I can’t guarantee that they will not force a default by doing something outrageous,” Mr. Biden said, referring to congressional Republicans who have insisted on deep cuts to federal spending in exchange for raising the borrowing limit.“The numbers are foundational here,” Representative Garret Graves, Republican of Louisiana and one of Mr. McCarthy’s lead negotiators, said on Sunday. “The speaker has been very clear: A red line is spending less money and unless and until we’re there, the rest of it is really irrelevant.”Treasury Department officials estimate that there are just over two weeks before the government could lose its ability to pay its bills on time, forcing a default. Both Mr. Biden and Mr. McCarthy had expressed rising optimism last week that they could reach an agreement that would pave the way for Congress to raise the borrowing limit while also reducing some federal spending.But on Friday, Republicans abruptly halted the talks, leading to a weekend of stop-and-start negotiations that left things in limbo and Mr. McCarthy insisting that Mr. Biden reinsert himself.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen is expected to provide another update to Congress on the government’s cash balance this week. On Sunday, Ms. Yellen indicated that her projections that the United States could be unable to pay all of its bills on time as soon as June 1 had not changed.“I certainly haven’t changed my assessment, so I think that that’s a hard deadline,” Ms. Yellen said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”Ms. Yellen noted that the government was expecting to receive substantial tax payments on June 15 that could extend the so-called X-date later into the summer. But she cautioned that the odds of making it that far were “quite low.”The Treasury secretary, who warned last week that a default would “generate an economic and financial catastrophe,” said she was not exaggerating the gravity of the looming crisis.“There will be hard choices to make if the debt ceiling isn’t raised,” Ms. Yellen said, explaining that if the United States ran out of money to pay all its bills, some would have to go unpaid.Hopes had dimmed at least slightly in the last few days. Mr. Biden’s aides accused Republicans of backsliding on key areas of negotiation, and Republicans accused the White House of refusing to budge on top priorities for conservatives.Mr. Biden criticized Republicans on Sunday for not considering raising additional tax revenue to reduce future budget deficits as part of the negotiations. He said he had proposed a discretionary spending cap that would save $1 trillion over a decade compared with baseline projections.“It’s time for Republicans to accept there is no budget deal to be made solely on their partisan terms,” he said.Representative Jodey C. Arrington, Republican of Texas and the chairman of the Budget Committee, on Sunday flatly ruled out Republicans’ accepting any tax increases as part of a debt-limit deal.“It’s not on the table for discussion,” Mr. Arrington said on ABC’s “This Week.” “This is not the time to put a tax on our economy or on working families.”Some of the barbs that have been traded by the parties appeared to be meant to shore up their bases. Hard-line spending hawks in the House have urged Mr. McCarthy to demand far greater concessions from Mr. Biden. Some progressive Democrats have pushed Mr. Biden to cut off negotiations and instead act unilaterally to challenge the debt limit on constitutional grounds.A clause in the 14th Amendment, adopted after the Civil War, stipulates that “the validity of the public debt” issued by the U.S. government “shall not be questioned.” Some legal scholars say the limit is constitutional. But others contend that the clause requires the government to continue issuing new debt to pay bondholders, effectively overriding the nation’s statutory borrowing limit, which is controlled by Congress.The two sides have found some agreement in talks in the last week, including on clawing back some unspent funds from previously approved Covid relief legislation. They have also agreed in broad terms to some sort of cap on discretionary federal spending for at least the next two years. But they are hung up on the details of those caps, including how much to spend overall next fiscal year on discretionary programs — and how to divide that spending among the military and other programs.The latest White House offer would hold both military spending and other spending — which includes education, scientific research and environmental protection — constant from the current fiscal year to next fiscal year, according to a person familiar with both sides’ proposals. That move would not reduce nominal spending before adjusting for inflation, which Republicans are pushing hard to do. Asked by a reporter on Sunday, Mr. Biden said the spending reduction he had proposed would not cause a recession.Speaker Kevin McCarthy at a news conference on debt-limit negotiations at the Capitol on Wednesday.Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesA bill that Republicans passed last month that paired spending cuts with a debt-limit increase would bring net savings of about $5 trillion over a decade compared with current projections.Republicans’ latest proposal includes a nominal drop in total discretionary spending next year. But that cut is not evenly distributed; in their plan, military spending would continue to rise, while other programs would face deeper cuts.Mr. Biden’s offer would set spending caps for two years. Republicans would set them for six years.Republicans have also proposed several efforts to save money that White House officials have objected to. They include new work requirements for recipients of Medicaid and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. They would also make it harder for states to seek waivers for work requirements for certain recipients of federal food assistance who live in areas of sustained high unemployment — a proposal that was not in the Republican debt-limit bill that passed the House.Republicans are also continuing to seek a reduction in enforcement funding for the I.R.S., a move that the Congressional Budget Office estimates would increase the budget deficit by decreasing future federal tax receipts. And they have sought to include some provisions from a stringent immigration bill that recently passed the House, according to a person familiar with the proposal.“We are all concerned about deficits and fiscal responsibility, but deficits can be addressed both through changes in spending and through changes in revenue,” Ms. Yellen said, adding that she was “greatly concerned” about Republican proposals to cut funding for the I.R.S. Mr. Biden insisted on Sunday that he was willing to cut spending. He also suggested that some Republicans were trying to crash the economy by not raising the borrowing limit, in order to hurt Mr. Biden’s hopes of winning re-election.If the nation were to default, Mr. Biden said, “I would be blameless” on the merits — meaning that it would be Republicans’ fault. But, he said, “on the politics of it, no one would be blameless.”“I think there are some MAGA Republicans in the House who know the damage that it would do to the economy, and because I am president, and the president’s responsible for everything, Biden would take the blame,” he said.Alan Rappeport More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Debt Limit Talks Resume After Republicans Briefly Hit Pause

    by

    Republicans returned to the negotiating table on Friday hours after walking out, though talks lasted only about an hour.Negotiations between top White House and Republican congressional officials over a deal to raise the debt limit resumed on Friday just hours after House G.O.P. leaders said it was time to “press pause,” complaining that President Biden’s team was being unreasonable and that no progress could be made.The abrupt turn reflected the unwieldy state of negotiations over a bipartisan deal to avert a debt default that could occur as soon as June 1. Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Friday evening declared the talks were back on after venting frustration with the White House earlier in the day. Negotiations then broke up again Friday night roughly an hour after they resumed, and it was unclear when negotiators planned to meet again.The hourlong meeting capped a day of whiplash on Capitol Hill, as negotiators searching for a resolution to avoiding the first default in the nation’s history repeatedly restarted and ended discussions, and Republicans showed signs of increasing exasperation around negotiations on spending caps.“It’s very frustrating if they want to come into the room and think we’re going to spend more money next year than we did this year,” Mr. McCarthy, a California Republican, said on Fox Business on Friday evening, as he announced that his deputies would return to the negotiating table. “That’s not right, and that’s not going to happen.”Earlier in the day, Mr. McCarthy and one of his top advisers had declared that they were halting negotiations, saying that White House officials were refusing to budge on spending cuts. “We’ve got to get movement by the White House, and we don’t have any movement,” Mr. McCarthy said.His comments marked a departure from his tone just a day earlier, when he told reporters that he could see a path to reaching a deal in principle as early as the weekend.Still, the return to the negotiating table on Friday night underscored the mounting sense of urgency to find a resolution as Congress runs out of time to avoid the first default in the nation’s history, and the economic calamity that could follow.Once a deal is in hand, it will take time to translate it into legislation and pass it through Congress for Mr. Biden’s signature. Mr. McCarthy has promised his conference that he will give lawmakers 72 hours to read the bill before they vote on it.Republicans hinted that a major source of their frustration was how strictly to cap federal spending. The bill that House Republicans passed last month would raise the nation’s borrowing limit into next year in exchange for freezing spending at last year’s levels for a decade — which would lead to cuts of an average of 18 percent.The bill is a dead letter in the Democratic-controlled Senate, but the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus declared on Thursday that Republicans should insist that it pass as is.“No more discussion on watering it down,” the group said in a tweet. “Period.”White House officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private negotiations, acknowledged that there were significant differences between the parties, including around Mr. McCarthy’s stance on capping federal spending.Former President Donald J. Trump also weighed in on Friday on Truth Social, the social media website he founded, declaring that Republicans should not make a deal on the debt ceiling unless they get everything they want. “DO NOT FOLD!!!” he wrote.Negotiators were at odds over a handful of issues, including the extent to which a possible deal would include tougher work requirements for social safety net programs — a proposal that has drawn a backlash from progressive Democrats — and the length of any debt-limit extension.Conservatives in the House G.O.P. conference had grown increasingly concerned in recent days that Mr. McCarthy would agree to a deal freezing spending at current levels, rather than at last year’s levels, and would not lock in the kind of spending cuts for which they have long agitated.Zolan Kanno-Youngs More

  • 163 Shares109 Views

    in Economy

    If Debt Ceiling Standoff Can’t Be Resolved, Both Parties Will Share the Blame

    by

    While each party tries to blame the other for the crisis, some acknowledge that they would both share responsibility for a default.Is it the Biden default? Or the Republican Default on America?Even as negotiators push forward with halting talks to resolve the federal debt-ceiling standoff, members of both parties are positioning themselves to try to dodge the blame for the economic fallout if things go south. Democrats lambaste Republicans for taking the debt ceiling hostage to appease “extreme MAGA” conservatives bent on shrinking government spending. Republicans hit Democrats for waiting too long to open talks and not taking G.O.P. demands seriously.But deep down — and in some cases not so deep — officials in both parties know they are all going to pay if they don’t get a deal, the government defaults and Americans lose money and jobs and confidence about their financial well-being and future.“I would hate to be the politician trying to explain to people when the economy is in the toilet that it’s not my fault, it’s their fault,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina. “Yeah, that ain’t going to work. They will flush us all.”Polls have suggested Mr. Graham’s view is correct. A Washington Post-ABC News Poll released earlier this month shows that the public is divided about who will bear the blame, with a significant chunk of independents saying the two sides should share it equally.And some on Capitol Hill say the political backlash will be well deserved if Congress and the White House manage to mangle the situation so badly that public officials careen into a completely avoidable crisis and send both the economy and the retirement accounts of millions of Americans reeling.“I can’t comprehend that anyone who had the ability to prevent this much damage to our country, our economy and our world standing would allow that to happen,” said Senator Joe Manchin III, Democrat of West Virginia, who had been among those pressing his party to engage in negotiations earlier. “It would be absolutely reprehensible. Everyone should get hammered.”But those likely reverberations haven’t yet motivated negotiators to come to an agreement and clear the way for an economic sigh of relief. Representative Garret Graves of Louisiana, the point man for House Republicans in the talks, abruptly exited a Friday negotiating session with administration representatives in the Capitol, accusing them of being “unreasonable,” and the talks were temporarily suspended. Suddenly, the path to a quick agreement that Speaker Kevin McCarthy had seen on Thursday was newly cluttered with obstacles. By the evening, talks had resumed.Such ups and downs in budget negotiations are fairly standard and can be performative as well as substantive. Both sides need to flex to show their respective forces that they are hanging tough and pushing for all they can get. But there are real differences in the positions of Democrats and Republicans on a host of issues on the bargaining table. A positive outcome is no certainty, despite regular high-level assurances that the United States cannot and will not default in the coming days.Still, should that occur, lawmakers and administration officials would like you to know that they didn’t do it.“Here we are on the brink of a Biden default,” Senator Shelley Moore Capito, Republican of West Virginia, declared this week both in person and via news release, sounding a refrain becoming increasingly popular with Republicans — that this was all Mr. Biden’s doing because he refused to engage with them earlier and allow enough time to work out an agreement.Not so, counter the Democrats. “We find ourselves in the midst of a G.O.P.-manufactured default crisis because House Republicans have chosen to try and hold our economy, our small businesses, everyday Americans hostage to unreasonable ransom demands,” Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, said.Republicans have a retort. They argue that since they squeezed legislation through the House last month that would raise the debt limit and enact spending cuts, they have bragging rights as well as immunity from any criticism because they are the only ones who have acted thus far — though it was widely known the bill could never pass the Democratic-majority Senate.“I don’t know how we own it if we raised the debt limit,” Mr. McCarthy said at the White House when asked if he was ready to face the consequences for a default. His colleagues share his view.“In my district I don’t think it would be a huge problem,” said Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma. “I did vote to raise the debt ceiling. Show me one person on the other side who did.”In addition, Republicans know it is traditionally the president who gets credit or fault for the state of the economy even if circumstances are well beyond control of the executive branch.Democrats scoff at the Republican claims. Senator Chuck Schumer, the New York Democrat and majority leader, dubbed the House legislation the Default on America Act, to try to capture both its impact and its dead-on-arrival status in the Senate. He and his fellow Democrats say they refuse to reward Republicans for what they view as highly irresponsible actions that are putting the nation’s economy at risk — even though both parties have used the debt limit for bargaining leverage over the years.“From the beginning, Democrats have said — I have said — that this process demands bipartisanship,” Mr. Schumer said this week. “It’s how we avoided default under President Trump. It’s how we have avoided default under President Biden, and it’s how we should avoid default this time too. Brinkmanship, hiding plans, hostage-taking — none of that will move us closer to a solution.”The two parties can continue to trade shots. But until they trade negotiating positions they can come to terms on, the threat of default hangs over Washington and the nation. And if that happens, those involved may find that the public won’t distinguish between who did or said what when, but will hold them all accountable. More

  • 175 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    In a Sharp Reversal, Biden Opens a Path for Ukraine to Get Fighter Jets

    by

    The president told allied leaders that he would allow Ukrainian pilots to be trained on American-made F-16s, and is prepared to approve other countries’ transferring the jets to Ukraine.President Biden told U.S. allies on Friday that he would allow Ukrainian pilots to be trained on American-made F-16 fighter jets, several U.S. officials said, adding that the president is prepared to let other countries give F-16s to Ukraine — a major upgrade of the Ukrainian military and a sharp reversal.Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine 15 months ago, officials in Kyiv have pleaded for advanced warplanes to overcome Russian air superiority. But Mr. Biden has resisted, concerned that the jets could be used to hit targets deep inside Russia, and prompt the Kremlin to escalate the conflict. Pentagon officials have said that other weapons, especially air defenses, were needed more urgently, and the high cost of the F-16s could squeeze out other matériel.But several European countries that belong to the NATO alliance and have F-16s in their arsenals have called for an international effort to provide the training and transfer of their jets to Ukraine. Doing so would require American permission, because the weapons were first sold to them by the United States. Though not the most advanced U.S. fighter, the F-16 carries powerful radar that can spot targets from hundreds of miles away and modern missiles and other technology that American officials do not want duplicated or falling into hostile hands.Mr. Biden told other leaders of the Group of 7 nations, the world’s wealthiest democracies, of his decision on pilot training, opening a path to supplying Ukraine with fighter jets, at their summit meeting in Hiroshima, Japan, according to several officials who requested anonymity to speak candidly about sensitive deliberations.They said the United States and its allies would discuss in the coming months how to supply Kyiv with the jets themselves, and one senior administration official said the White House was prepared to approve that step. The United States is not expected, at least under current plans, to send its own F-16s.A group of F-16s flying over Washington, in March. Ukraine has said it needs the jets to compete effectively with Russia’s air force.Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“I welcome the historic decision of the United States and @POTUS to support an international fighter jet coalition. This will greatly enhance our army in the sky,” President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, who is expected to address the Group of 7 this weekend, wrote on Twitter.In a joint statement, the allied leaders said they were committed “to continuing our security assistance to Ukraine as it defends itself against Russia’s aggression, tailoring our support to Ukraine’s needs.” The group vowed to provide “financial, humanitarian, military and diplomatic support Ukraine requires for as long as it takes.”Earlier on Friday, Mr. Zelensky had addressed an Arab League summit in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where he challenged the neutral stance many Arab countries have adopted on the war and implored them to help save Ukrainians “from the cages of Russian prisons.” “Unfortunately there are some in the world, and here among you, who turn a blind eye to those cages and illegal annexations,” he said. “I am here so that everyone can take an honest look, no matter how hard the Russians try to influence.”Western officials said Mr. Zelensky planned to travel to Hiroshima this weekend to attend the summit meeting. Ukrainian officials gave conflicting accounts, however, with some saying he would appear in person and others saying he would speak to the leaders by video link. The vagueness appears to reflect security concerns as Mr. Zelensky moves across the globe seeking aid and arms; he was in several European countries last week, as well as Saudi Arabia on Friday.Ukraine is expected to launch a major counteroffensive soon, hoping to retake more territory seized by Russia in the war’s early days. Any delivery of fighter jets would be months away, too late to affect that plan.The Group of 7 leaders in Hiroshima spent much of the day discussing the coming counteroffensive and its chances of forcing Russia to the negotiating table to discuss some form of an armistice that would stop the fighting, even if it did not resolve the central issues of the war.They are also poised to unveil a slew of new sanctions and export controls to clamp down further on the Kremlin’s ability to fund the war, and to crack down on third-party nations that have been secretly providing Russia with banned technologies that can be used in weapons systems.Earlier on Friday, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine told a gathering of the Arab League not to “turn a blind eye” to the atrocities committed by the Russian forces.Saudi Press Agency/EPA, via ShutterstockThe allies appear determined to demonstrate unified resolve to support Ukraine at a time when President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia seems to be betting that their interest and commitment will wane.Mr. Biden’s changed stance on F-16s is his latest about-face on allowing Ukraine to field advanced weapons, including HIMARS rocket launchers, Patriot air defense missile systems and Abrams tanks. In each case, the president at first refused, only to change his mind under pressure from European allies.Top Pentagon officials have consistently said that they do not believe Ukraine needs F-16s at this stage of the conflict.Celeste A. Wallander, the assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, told the House Armed Services Committee last month that advanced Western fighter aircraft ranked only “about eighth” on Ukraine’s priority list. She said officials have focused on resources with the “highest priority capabilities, and that has been air defense, artillery and armor.”But the push for F-16s by Ukraine and its supporters in Congress was reinforced this week when Yahoo News reported that an internal U.S. Air Force assessment concluded it would take only four months to train Ukrainian pilots to operate the fighters, a far shorter time frame than Pentagon officials had cited previously.The document, which a senior Air Force official confirmed and said was shared with several NATO allies who fly F-16s, contained a detailed assessment undertaken in late February and early March at Morris Air National Guard Base in Tucson, Ariz. Two Ukrainian pilots were given “no formal training” on the F-16, according to the assessment, other than a brief familiarization, and then were tested on a flight simulator for several hours.A Ukrainian soldier passes a crater caused by Russian bombardment in the village of Heorhiivka in eastern Ukraine. Kyiv says F-16s would greatly increase their forces’ ability to defend against aerial attacks.Finbarr O’Reilly for The New York TimesAn appearance by Mr. Zelensky at the Group of 7 would be a strong rebuff to Mr. Putin and a reminder of how thoroughly relations with Russia have deteriorated. Thirty years ago, President Clinton met with Boris Yeltsin, then the president of Russia, in Japan to begin to map the integration of a post-Soviet Russia into the world economy, as Mr. Clinton promised to seek the repeal of Cold War sanctions. Five years later, Russia joined what became the Group of 8.Now all that has been reversed. After Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, it was suspended from the group, and left it entirely three years later. Russia’s economy is struggling under sanctions imposed since the invasion last year, particularly the price cap on its oil sales, and more are coming.Britain on Friday said it was implementing a ban on Russian diamonds, copper, aluminum and nickel. Australia also said on Friday it was imposing new financial sanctions targeting 21 entities and three individuals, including Russia’s largest gold company, petroleum and steel companies and defense entities.The United States also rolled out a “substantial package” of restrictions, including cutting off 70 more firms from American exports and adding more than 200 individuals and entities to its sanctions list. The measures are meant to crack down on people or companies that are helping Moscow to evade existing sanctions.The fresh round of penalties “will further tighten the vise on Putin’s ability to wage his barbaric invasion and will advance our global efforts to cut off Russian attempts to evade sanctions,” Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said in a statement on Friday.Until now, the Ukraine war has seemed far away from daily life in Moscow, but Russian leaders are growing increasingly nervous about the repercussions of a promised Ukrainian counteroffensive.Natalia Kolesnikova/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe United States will broaden sanctions to cover more corners of the Russian economy, striking at its avenues to acquire semiconductors and other high-tech goods from Group of 7 nations, which American officials said Friday are critical to Russia’s ability to build weapons. Antony J. Blinken, the secretary of state, said in a release that the new sanctions would take aim at components Russia needs to build a drone that is currently being deployed in Ukraine.The new penalties also seek to squeeze Russia’s ability to drill for oil and gas, and to crimp venture capitalists and financial services firms that American officials said were aiding sanctioned Russian businesses.Goods that Western businesses are now prohibited from selling to Russian buyers often reach them through middlemen — changing hands, legal jurisdictions and free-trade zones multiple times. The trade is hard to track and harder to enforce, especially for “dual use” goods that have both civilian and military applications.With many of Russia’s other revenue streams squeezed by previous rounds of sanctions, officials have homed in on diamonds as a lucrative trade still providing Moscow with funding for its war. Russia is the world’s largest supplier of small diamonds, exporting more than $4.5 billion in 2021, making the gem its top non-energy export by value. More