More stories

  • in

    The Debt Limit Workarounds: The Coin, the Constitution, Premium Bonds

    As Congress hurtles toward a debt limit showdown, ways to work around it are garnering attention.Move over, trillion-dollar coin, there is a new debt limit workaround in town — and this one sounds more sophisticated, which some of its proponents have suggested could make it more likely to work.For years, debt limit skeptics have argued that the United States can get around the cap on how much it can borrow by minting a large-denomination coin, depositing it in the government’s account at the Federal Reserve. Officials could then use the resulting money to pay the country’s bills. The maneuver would exploit a quirk in U.S. law, which gives the Treasury secretary wide discretion when it comes to minting platinum coins.But there have always been challenges with the idea: Treasury has expressed little appetite. It is unclear whether the Fed would take the coin. It just sounds unconventional to the point of absurdity. And now, some are arguing for a fancier-sounding alternative: premium bonds.The government typically funds itself by issuing debt in the form of financial securities called bonds and bills. They are worth a set amount after a fixed period of time — for example, $1,000 in 10 years — and they pay “coupons” twice a year in between. Typically, those coupon rates are set near market interest rates.But in the premium bond idea, the government would renew old, expiring bonds at higher coupon rates. Doing so would not technically add to the nation’s debt — if the government previously had a 10-year bond worth $1,000 outstanding, it would still have a 10-year bond worth $1,000 outstanding. But investors would pay more to hold a bond that pays $7 a year than one that pays $3.50, so promising a higher interest rate would allow Treasury to raise more money.Would those higher interest rates, which would cost the government more money, pose a problem? Not technically. The debt limit applies to the face value of outstanding federal government debt ($1,000 in our example), not future promises to pay interest.And the idea could also come in a slightly different flavor. The government could issue bonds that pay regular coupons, but which never pay back principal, or perpetual bonds. People would buy them for the long-term cash stream, and they would not add to the principal of debt outstanding.The premium bond idea has gained support from some big names. The economic commentator Matthew Yglesias brought it up in January, the Bloomberg columnist Matt Levine has written about it, and The New York Times columnist and Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman made a case for it this week.But even some proponents of premium bonds acknowledge that it could face legal challenges or damage the United States’ reputation in the eyes of investors. Plus, their design and issuance would have to happen fast.“Normally, Treasury makes changes slowly, with lots of consulting of bond market participants and advance announcement of auctions,” said Joseph E. Gagnon, an economist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, adding that the government might have to offer a discount.But, he added, it “sure beats defaulting” and he “would argue it is better than not paying workers or retirees.”While the premium bond idea might come in different packaging, it has a lot of similarities with the coin idea. Either plan would exploit a loophole to add to government coffers without actually lifting the debt limit. Because both are seen as gimmicky, it could be hard for either to become reality.Of all the options the government could use to unilaterally get around the debt ceiling, “they are the least likely in our opinion,” said Chris Krueger, a policy analyst at TD Cowen.But a workaround that hinges on the 14th Amendment could garner broader support, Mr. Krueger said. That would leverage a clause in the Constitution that says that the validity of public debt should not be questioned.Some legal scholars contend that language overrides the statutory borrowing limit, which currently caps federal debt at $31.4 trillion. The idea is that the government’s responsibility to pay what it owes would trump the debt limit rules — so the debt limit could be ignored.It would not be a perfect solution: The move would draw an immediate court challenge and could sow uncertainty in the bond market, even its proponents acknowledge. Still, some White House officials have looked into the option. More

  • in

    ‘There Are No Good Options’: The U.S. Is Running Out of Money

    Treasury is running out of cash, leaving little time to resolve a debt ceiling standoff that could result in default.President Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy will meet on Tuesday afternoon to discuss budget priorities and raising the debt limit at a precarious moment: The United States is quickly running out of cash to pay its bills.Lawmakers have less than a month to pass legislation to increase or suspend the debt ceiling, which caps the amount of money the government can borrow. The United States reached its statutory $31.4 trillion debt limit on Jan. 19, and the Treasury Department estimates that the accounting maneuvers it has been employing to prop up its cash reserves could be exhausted as soon as June 1.If the debt ceiling is not raised before the government runs out of cash — what is known as the X-date — it could be unable to pay all its bills on time, including military salaries, payments to bondholders and Social Security checks. Barring a solution, millions of Americans could stop receiving government benefits, stock markets could plunge, and a constitutional crisis could ensue.The Bipartisan Policy Center, a think tank that tracks the nation’s cash reserves, warned on Tuesday that the X-date was likely to be between early June and early August. It said that economic risks would start to surge before the money ran out and that meeting the nation’s financial obligations would soon become increasingly difficult.“The coming weeks are critical for assessing the strength of government cash flows,” said Shai Akabas, the director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center. “If a solution is not reached before June, policymakers may be playing daily Russian roulette with the full faith and credit of the United States, risking financial disaster for their constituents and the country.”A default could come sooner than expected because tax revenues have been trickling into the government’s coffers this spring. The sluggish pace is due in part to a decision by the Internal Revenue Service to give taxpayers in states that were affected by severe weather more time to file their 2022 taxes.The brinkmanship has renewed questions about how the federal government might try to prioritize certain payments if it does run out of cash, whether Mr. Biden could ignore the debt limit entirely and order the Treasury Department to continue borrowing, and if far-fetched ideas such as minting a $1 trillion coin could in fact be viable.Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said on Monday that if the debt limit was not raised, then Mr. Biden would have to decide how to proceed.“I would say that if Congress doesn’t raise the debt ceiling, the president will have to make some decisions about what to do with the resources that we do have,” Ms. Yellen said on CNBC. “And there are a variety of different options, but there are no good options.”She added that failing to raise or suspend the debt limit would be an “economic catastrophe” and assailed Republicans for holding the economy hostage.“It’s a gun to the head of the American people and the American economy,” Ms. Yellen said.Mr. Biden and Mr. McCarthy will be joined by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, and Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader. Ms. Yellen is traveling to Japan on Tuesday for a gathering of finance ministers of the Group of 7 nations and will not be participating in the meeting at the White House.The Biden administration and lawmakers are under growing pressure from business groups to find a way to avoid a default.“A default would deliver a severe blow to the economy, leading to widespread job losses, decimated retirement savings and higher borrowing costs for families, businesses and the government,” said Joshua Bolten, the chief executive of the Business Roundtable. “Failing to raise the debt limit would also threaten the U.S. dollar’s central role in the global financial system to the benefit of China.”He added: “Securing a bipartisan path forward to raise the debt ceiling could not be more urgent.” More

  • in

    Biden and McCarthy to Discuss Debt Limit as a Possible Default Looms

    The president will host the House speaker and other congressional leaders at the White House on Tuesday to discuss their impasse over the debt ceiling and spending cuts.WASHINGTON — President Biden will meet with Speaker Kevin McCarthy at the White House on Tuesday in a critical face-to-face confrontation that will frame their showdown over the federal debt and spending in the weeks before the nation is set to default on its obligations for the first time in history.With the American and perhaps the global economy hanging in the balance, the meeting will be the first sit-down session between the Democratic president and Republican speaker since February. But even the terms of the discussion are in dispute: Mr. McCarthy insists the president negotiate a debt ceiling deal with him, while Mr. Biden insists the meeting will just be an opportunity to tell the speaker that there will be no negotiations over the limit.The meeting in the Oval Office will feature Mr. Biden, Mr. McCarthy and three other congressional leaders: Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic leader in the House, and Senators Chuck Schumer of New York and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Democratic and Republican leaders in the Senate. But Mr. Biden and Mr. McCarthy are the key players, locked in a political game of chicken to see who will blink first on raising the debt ceiling.With the federal government expected to default on its debt as soon as June 1 without an agreement, Mr. McCarthy and his Republican caucus have refused to raise the debt ceiling without commitments to major spending cuts. Mr. Biden has said he would discuss ways to reduce the deficit but has refused to link any spending decisions to the debt ceiling increase, arguing that Congress should simply raise the ceiling as it has for generations to pay for spending already approved.Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, repeatedly referred to Mr. Biden’s meeting with Mr. McCarthy on Tuesday as a “conversation” rather than negotiations.Pete Marovich for The New York Times“We should not have House Republicans manufacturing a crisis on something that has been done 78 times since 1960,” Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, said on Monday. “This is their constitutional duty. Congress must act. That’s what the president is going to make very clear with the leaders tomorrow.”The meeting that Mr. Biden has called, she added, will not involve any haggling over the debt ceiling. “I wouldn’t call it ‘debt ceiling negotiations,’” she said in reply to a reporter who used that phrase. “I would call it a conversation.” In fact, she was so intent on calling it a “conversation” that she used the word to describe the meeting 15 times during her briefing.Neither side expects any breakthrough at the session, scheduled for 4 p.m., but instead the leaders plan to use it to emphasize their positions in the dispute, in effect setting the parameters for the debate that will play out over the next few weeks. In recent years, such standoffs have not been resolved until the final hours and days before a deadline — or the deadline is extended.Mr. Biden has indicated that he is willing to have a separate discussion with Mr. McCarthy and the Republicans over spending that is not directly linked to the debt ceiling legislation. White House officials said the president plans to push Republicans to consider the tax increases and prescription drug savings he laid out in his most recent budget, which would reduce deficits by an estimated $3 trillion over 10 years, as part of a larger package to reduce debt accumulation over time.He is likely to challenge Republicans in Tuesday’s meeting to be more specific in the spending they would cut. He has hammered them for more than a week over the potential consequences — like reduced funding for veterans’ health services — that could result from the discretionary spending caps they included in a debt ceiling bill that passed the House late last month.Republicans have bristled at the president’s attacks on their legislation, calling them misleading. But they noted that unlike the Democrats, they at least have passed a measure to raise the debt ceiling, albeit conditioned on spending cuts. They argued that Mr. Biden and his Democratic allies have to come to the table with a counterproposal. Otherwise, they maintain, it would be the Democrats, not the Republicans, who failed to raise the debt ceiling, leading to a possible default.“They have to now step up and act like responsible leaders,” Representative Jodey C. Arrington, a Republican from Texas and the chairman of the House Budget Committee, said on CNBC on Monday. “We’ve done that, and we have set that example, and we have placed in their hands a list of proposals that we have gotten consensus on. It’s their time to respond, and the American people expect them to.” More

  • in

    In Debt Limit Talks, Biden and Republicans Start Far Apart

    As the president prepares to meet with Speaker Kevin McCarthy this week, his budget shares little common ground with spending and tax proposals from House Republicans.President Biden is set to welcome Speaker Kevin McCarthy and other top congressional leaders to the White House on Tuesday for a pivotal round of discussions about the nation’s taxes, spending and debt as a potentially catastrophic government default rapidly approaches.The talks come just weeks before the United States is expected to run out of cash to pay its bills unless the nation’s borrowing cap is lifted. Like previous moments of brinkmanship, the discussions have echoes of 2011 and 2013, when congressional Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling unless a Democratic president agreed to curb federal spending and reduce budget deficits. The same dynamic is at play now, but with a crucial difference: The parties share almost no common ground on tax and spending proposals that are meant to reduce the growth of the nation’s $31.4 trillion debt.The meeting is not expected to produce anything close to final agreement on a fiscal plan that could include raising the debt limit. But even small points of consensus could be hard to come by.Mr. Biden wants to expand federal spending and reduce future debt, largely by raising taxes on high earners and large companies. Republicans have passed a bill to cut federal discretionary spending — a category that includes national parks, education and more — and cancel tax breaks for certain low-emission energy sources that were part of Mr. Biden’s signature climate law. Republicans have promised to extend the 2017 tax cuts that were approved by President Donald J. Trump and are set to expire at the end of 2025.While both sides say they want to reduce the nation’s future debt burden, there is almost no overlap in how they aim to achieve that outcome. The only point of agreement so far is on the one thing Mr. Biden and Mr. McCarthy consider off limits in budget talks: Social Security and Medicare, the primary sources of projected federal spending growth in the decades to come.The gulf on fiscal issues is one of several complicating factors in discussions over the debt limit, which the government technically hit earlier this year. Officials have been employing what are essentially accounting maneuvers to keep paying all the government’s bills on time without going over the current $31.4 trillion limit. But Janet L. Yellen, the Treasury secretary, warned in a letter last week that those efforts will no longer be possible as soon as June 1, risking a debt default that economists warn could spawn a financial crisis and recession.We Hit the Debt Limit. What Happens Now?Lawmakers will need to reach a bipartisan agreement to lift the debt limit. The longer it takes, the more turmoil there could be for the United States and the global economy.Mr. Biden has refused to negotiate directly over the limit, saying Republicans must vote to raise it without conditions, given that it simply allows the government to pay for spending that lawmakers in both parties have already approved. But he invited Mr. McCarthy and other congressional leaders to come to the White House on Tuesday for what he called a separate negotiation on fiscal policy — even though it is effectively linked to the debt limit drama.Republicans say they will not raise the limit without significant curbs in spending. That is the same position they took in 2011 and 2013, under President Barack Obama, when Mr. Biden was vice president. They did not make similar demands to raise the limit when they controlled Congress at the start of Mr. Trump’s term and Republican votes helped to effectively raise the limit.In 2011, Mr. Obama entered debt limit negotiations with a set of proposed spending cuts. They included a five-year freeze on discretionary spending not related to national security, a separate freeze on federal workers’ salaries for two years and the elimination of an air-to-air missile program and a fighting vehicle for the Marine Corps. Republicans countered with a budget that featured deep cuts to federal health care spending, privatizing Medicare for future beneficiaries and new tax cuts.Republicans ultimately agreed to raise the debt limit in exchange for budget changes centered on caps on discretionary spending — essentially modifying and expanding the spending freeze Mr. Obama had proposed in his budget.Unlike Mr. Obama more than a decade ago, Mr. Biden has never agreed with Republicans’ argument that federal spending has grown too large. He has proposed to scale back the growth in government debt, but his aides reject the Republican contention that the current path of the debt poses a significant threat to economic growth.Mr. Biden’s most recent budget included $3 trillion in proposals to reduce future deficits. The savings would come largely from tax increases on the wealthy and big corporations, along with cutting government spending on health care by broadening Medicare’s ability to negotiate prescription drug prices.Republicans have rejected all the tax increases and criticized Mr. Biden earlier this year for not proposing to spend even more on the military than he already did.House Republicans have not put forth or passed a budget. The bill they passed last month would raise the debt limit by $1.5 trillion or through March 2024, whichever came first. It would reduce future deficits by nearly $5 trillion, largely by freezing certain federal spending for a decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.It also included new supports for fossil fuels, a rollback of Mr. Biden’s climate change agenda and an end to the president’s attempt to cancel student loan debt for most borrowers, which appears likely to be struck down by the Supreme Court regardless.Neither side has found anything to like in the other’s starting position. Republicans “didn’t produce a budget,” Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic leader, who will join Mr. McCarthy at the White House meeting, told NBC News on Sunday. “What they did was produce a ransom note.”Representative Jodey C. Arrington of Texas, the chairman of the Budget Committee, countered that Mr. Biden would have to relent and negotiate with Republicans.Mr. Biden “has negotiated, as vice president and as a senator, debt ceiling increases, with common-sense spending controls and fiscal reforms,” Mr. Arrington told Fox News on Sunday. “And we’re just asking him to be a responsible leader and do that again.” More

  • in

    What Options Biden Has in the Debt Limit Crisis

    The president has not wavered in his calls for Republicans to raise the nation’s borrowing limit without condition. Privately, his aides have discussed other paths.The federal government has perhaps less than a month left before an economically devastating default on its debt.No matter who bears the political blame for a default, aides acknowledge that President Biden has a lot to lose if the nation tips into recession just as he is moving into his re-election campaign.Mr. Biden has several strategic options as he tries to prevent that from happening. All have been the subject of discussions inside the administration and with Democratic allies in recent weeks. They range from continuing to hold out for Republicans to raise the nation’s debt limit with no strings attached to preparing unilateral action to effectively bypass the limit and keep paying the nation’s bills.Some involve negotiations with Republican leaders, which Mr. Biden will insist are not related to the debt limit even though they would be.Each path carries risks, which administration officials acknowledge privately. The biggest by far is economic calamity: White House economists warned in an analysis released on Wednesday that if the country defaulted on its debt and that default continued for several months, the economy would shed eight million jobs as it entered recession.The economists also warned that merely approaching a possible default would rattle markets and drive up borrowing costs across the economy, “inhibiting firms’ ability to finance themselves and engage in the productive investment that is essential for extending the current expansion.”Here are the paths available to Mr. Biden, as his aides and allies see them.Stay the courseMr. Biden has insisted for months that lawmakers must raise the nation’s borrowing cap with no conditions attached, saying that it simply allows the United States to pay for spending Congress has already authorized. He could continue to do so, refusing to negotiate, as many progressives have urged him to do.It would be an attempt to stare down House Republicans, who last week passed a bill pairing an increase in the limit with cuts to federal spending and a reversal of Mr. Biden’s climate agenda. Mr. Biden would effectively be daring Speaker Kevin McCarthy of California to allow the government to run out of cash to pay its bills on time, which the Treasury Department estimates could happen as soon as June 1.The risk is that Mr. McCarthy refuses to give in, pointing to the House bill as evidence that Republicans had done enough to raise the debt limit. Mr. Biden would count on pressure from business groups and turmoil in financial markets to push Republicans to blink at the last moment and at least pass a bill to avoid default for a few weeks or months. But as of now, House Republicans have shown no willingness to pass such a bill, known as a “clean” debt-limit increase. Neither have a critical mass of Senate Republicans needed to advance the bill in that chamber.Shalanda Young, the White House budget director, said, “I have hope that we will find a path to avoid default.”Pete Marovich for The New York TimesNegotiate spending cuts not tied to the debt limitMr. Biden will welcome Mr. McCarthy and other congressional leaders to the White House next week for talks about fiscal policy — how much the nation taxes, spends and borrows. The president says those talks are divorced from the debt limit, but effectively, they are not.The deadline hanging over the talks is the so-called X-date, estimated for June 1; Mr. Biden’s invitation to congressional leaders was accelerated by the revised projections of when that date will hit. In contrast, the bill funding federal government operations, which Mr. Biden signed late last year, runs through the end of September.Mr. Biden could negotiate without “negotiating” by trying to broker an early agreement on spending levels for the next fiscal year, before the X-date. In exchange, Mr. McCarthy would commit to passing a clean extension of the debt limit.Business groups and even some administration officials expect any deal of that nature to center on limits on federal discretionary spending — though almost certainly not as stringent as the ones in the bill Republicans have passed. White House officials have said privately for months that they do not expect the House to approve significant spending increases for next year anyway, so some sort of limits may prove palatable to Mr. Biden, depending on the details.The risk of that strategy is that Mr. McCarthy’s most conservative members have shown no appetite for a deal of that scope. Mr. Biden will not accept those members’ more sweeping demands. That complicates the prospects for an agreement that runs through the speaker.Speaker Kevin McCarthy pointed to the bill the House passed last week as evidence that Republicans had done enough to raise the debt limit.Kenny Holston/The New York TimesBypass McCarthyMr. Biden could try to bypass the speaker and court a handful of moderate Republicans in the House and the Senate to vote to raise the limit, offering some fiscal concessions as an enticement. Bringing such a deal to the House floor could require some legislative maneuvering, like the so-called discharge petition Democrats have been keeping at the ready for months.It could also require a different approach from Mr. Biden to the congressional Republicans he needs to pass such a bill. Moderate Republicans in the House say they are receiving little friendly outreach from the White House so far. Instead, Biden administration officials have gleefully hammered them for voting to advance the Republican debt-limit bill and its deep spending cuts.This week administration officials have posted, again and again, the headshots and names of House Republicans on Mr. Biden’s official Twitter account, accusing them of voting to cut funding to veterans’ programs and Meals on Wheels. Two of the featured lawmakers were members of leadership, including Mr. McCarthy. Two others were high-profile, far-right congresswomen. The remainder — more than two dozen — were lawmakers in seats Mr. Biden won in 2020.Officials have defended that strategy. “I have hope that we will find a path to avoid default,” Shalanda Young, the White House budget director, told reporters on Thursday, after assailing budget cuts included in the Republican bill. “But it’s our job to keep coming to you, to go to the American people, and make sure people understand what this debate is about.”Go it aloneIf Mr. Biden’s chosen tactics do not produce a bill he will sign that raises the debt limit before the X-date, the president will have to choose between allowing the nation to default or pursuing what is effectively a constitutional challenge to the debt ceiling by continuing to borrow to pay the bills when the government runs out of cash.That challenge would be rooted in a clause in the 14th Amendment that stipulates that the government must pay its debts. Administration officials have debated that idea, with no resolution, for months. But even its proponents concede that it would not be a perfect solution. The move would draw an immediate court challenge and sow at least temporary uncertainty in the bond market, sending government borrowing costs soaring.Catie Edmondson More

  • in

    House Democrats Move to Force a Debt-Limit Increase as Default Date Looms

    House Democratic leaders who have been quietly planning a strategy to force a debt ceiling increase to avert default began taking steps on Tuesday to deploy their secret weapon.The only clue to the gambit was in the title of the otherwise obscure hodgepodge of a bill: “The Breaking the Gridlock Act.”But the 45-page legislation, introduced without fanfare in January by a little-known Democrat, Representative Mark DeSaulnier of California, is part of a confidential, previously unreported, strategy Democrats have been plotting for months to quietly smooth the way for action by Congress to avert a devastating federal default if debt ceiling talks remain deadlocked.With a possible default now projected as soon as June 1, Democrats on Tuesday began taking steps to deploy the secret weapon they have been holding in reserve. They started the process of trying to force a debt-limit increase bill to the floor through a so-called discharge petition that could bypass Republican leaders who have refused to raise the ceiling unless President Biden agrees to spending cuts and policy changes.“House Democrats are working to make sure we have all options at our disposal to avoid a default,” Representative Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, wrote in a letter he sent to colleagues on Tuesday. “The filing of a debt ceiling measure to be brought up on the discharge calendar preserves an important option. It is now time for MAGA Republicans to act in a bipartisan manner to pay America’s bills without extreme conditions.”An emergency rule Democrats introduced on Tuesday, during a pro forma session held while the House is in recess, would start the clock on a process that would allow them to begin collecting signatures as soon as May 16 on such a petition, which can force action on a bill if a majority of members sign on. The open-ended rule would provide a vehicle to bring Mr. DeSaulnier’s bill to the floor and amend it with a Democratic proposal — which has yet to be written — to resolve the debt limit crisis.The strategy is no silver bullet, and Democrats concede it is a long shot. Gathering enough signatures to force a bill to the floor would take at least five Republicans willing to cross party lines if all Democrats signed on, a threshold that Democrats concede will be difficult to reach. They have yet to settle on the debt ceiling proposal itself, and for the strategy to succeed, Democrats would likely need to negotiate with a handful of mainstream Republicans to settle on a measure they could accept.A handful of hard-right Republicans explicitly warned their colleagues on Tuesday not to go down that path. “House Republicans: don’t defect!” Senator Mike Lee of Utah wrote on Twitter.Still, Democrats argue that the prospect of a successful effort could force House Republicans into a more acceptable deal. And Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen’s announcement on Monday that a potential default was only weeks away spurred Democratic leaders to act.House Democratic leaders have for months played down the possibility of initiating a discharge petition as a way out of the stalemate. They are hesitant to budge from the party position, which Mr. Biden has articulated repeatedly, that Republicans should agree to raise the debt limit with no conditions or concessions on spending cuts.But behind the scenes, they were simultaneously taking steps to make sure a vehicle was available if needed.There were no signs on Tuesday of any momentum toward even a temporary resolution. Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, brushed aside the idea of putting off a confrontation by passing a short-term debt limit increase, telling reporters: “We should not kick the can down the road.”And Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, reiterated that he intended to leave the negotiations to Mr. Biden and Speaker Kevin McCarthy, again dashing the private hopes of some Democrats that the veteran Republican would ultimately cut a deal with them to allow the debt ceiling to be lifted, as he has done in the past.“There is no solution in the Senate,” Mr. McConnell said.The White House had no public comment on the discharge effort, according to Karine Jean-Pierre, the press secretary. Mr. Biden is scheduled next week to host Mr. McCarthy and other congressional leaders at the White House to discuss raising the debt limit. His goal at that meeting, a senior administration official said, will be to stress the importance of averting default and creating a separate negotiation to address other budget issues.The discharge petition process can be time-consuming and complicated, so House Democrats who devised the strategy started early and carefully crafted their legislative vehicle. Insiders privately refer to the measure as a “Swiss Army knife” bill — one intended to be referred to every single House committee in order to keep open as many opportunities as possible for forcing it to the floor.It would create a task force to help grandparents raising grandchildren, create a federal strategy for reducing earthquake risks, change the name of a law that governs stock trading by members of Congress, extend small business loans, protect veterans from the I.R.S., authorize a new Pentagon grant program to protect nonprofit organizations against terrorist attacks and more. The legislation was so broad and eclectic that it was referred to 20 committees, where it has sat idle for months. That was the point.Mr. DeSaulnier’s intent was never to pass the elements of the bill, though he favors them all. It was to create what is known on Capitol Hill as a shell of a bill that would ultimately serve as the basis for a discharge petition — and a way out of the debt limit standoff.“I wrote it in a way to be prepared,” said Mr. DeSaulnier, a former member of the Rules Committee who worked with Democratic procedural experts to craft legislation that could provide a debt-limit escape hatch. “I anticipated there would be these problems with the Republican caucus, whether it was abortion or the debt limit. I think it was the responsible thing as a legislator to do.”Democrats say the beauty of Mr. DeSaulnier’s bill — which Republicans have ignored — is that it long ago passed the threshold of being held in committee for at least 30 days, the minimum length of time to initiate a discharge petition to force action on legislation. Even so, in a memo sent to members on Tuesday, a U.S. Chamber of Commerce analysis projected that even if Democrats were able to draw enough support for their plan and advance it without further delay, the measure could take until June 12 or 13 to clear Congress — many days beyond the earliest date Ms. Yellen has warned the debt limit could be reached.Democrats said the fact that their bill would fall under the jurisdiction of so many committees gave them several options for moving forward.Mr. DeSaulnier was picked to sponsor the measure because his low profile meant there was likely to be little attention to his bill. In contrast, any legislation introduced by Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Rules Committee, would have drawn attention immediately, and Republicans might have been able to take action to derail it.Discharge petitions have spurred action in the past by prompting House leaders to move on issues rather than lose control of the floor through a guerrilla legislative effort. But the procedure is rarely successful and has produced a law in only a handful of cases, including the approval of major bipartisan campaign finance legislation in 2002. Congressional leaders of both parties have been disdainful of such efforts, since they effectively wrest control of the House floor from the majority.Democrats say that the current situation, with a default looming, showed that they were taking prudent precautions with Mr. DeSaulnier’s bill. Besides thwarting gridlock, the legislation says its purpose is also “to advance common-sense policy priorities.”Catie Edmondson More

  • in

    Is the Debt Limit Constitutional? Biden Aides Are Debating It.

    As the government heads toward a possible default on its debt as soon as next month, officials are entertaining a legal theory that previous administrations ruled out.A standoff between House Republicans and President Biden over raising the nation’s borrowing limit has administration officials debating what to do if the government runs out of cash to pay its bills, including one option that previous administrations had deemed unthinkable.That option is effectively a constitutional challenge to the debt limit. Under the theory, the government would be required by the 14th Amendment to continue issuing new debt to pay bondholders, Social Security recipients, government employees and others, even if Congress fails to lift the limit before the so-called X-date.That theory rests on the 14th Amendment clause stating that “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”Some legal scholars contend that language overrides the statutory borrowing limit, which currently caps federal debt at $31.4 trillion and requires congressional approval to raise or lift.Top economic and legal officials at the White House, the Treasury Department and the Justice Department have made that theory a subject of intense and unresolved debate in recent months, according to several people familiar with the discussions.It is unclear whether President Biden would support such a move, which would have serious ramifications for the economy and almost undoubtedly elicit legal challenges from Republicans. Continuing to issue debt in that situation would avoid an immediate disruption in consumer demand by maintaining government payments, but borrowing costs are likely to soar, at least temporarily.Still, the debate is taking on new urgency as the United States inches closer to default. Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen warned on Monday that the government could run out of cash as soon as June 1 if the borrowing cap is not lifted.Mr. Biden is set to meet with Speaker Kevin McCarthy of California at the White House on May 9 to discuss fiscal policy, along with other top congressional leaders from both parties. The president’s invitation was spurred by the accelerated warning of the arrival of the X-date.But it remains unclear what type of compromise may be reached in time to avoid a default. House Republicans have refused to raise or suspend the debt ceiling unless Mr. Biden accepts spending cuts, fossil fuel supports and a repeal of Democratic climate policies, contained in a bill that narrowly cleared the chamber last week.Mr. Biden has said Congress must raise the limit without conditions, though he has also said he is open to separate discussions about the nation’s fiscal path.A White House spokesman declined to comment on Tuesday.A group of legal scholars and some liberal activists have pushed the constitutional challenge to the borrowing limit for more than a decade. No previous administration has taken it up. Lawyers at the White House and the Justice and Treasury Departments have never issued formal opinions on the question. And legal scholars disagree about the constitutionality of such a move.“The Constitution’s text bars the federal government from defaulting on the debt — even a little, even for a short while,” Garrett Epps, a constitutional scholar at the University of Oregon’s law school, wrote in November. “There’s a case to be made that if Congress decides to default on the debt, the president has the power and the obligation to pay it without congressional permission, even if that requires borrowing more money to do so.”Other legal scholars say the limit is constitutional. “The statute is a necessary component of Congress’s power to borrow and has proved capable of serving as a useful catalyst for budgetary reform aimed at debt reduction,” Anita S. Krishnakumar, a Georgetown University law professor, wrote in a 2005 law review article.The president has repeatedly said it is the job of Congress to raise the limit to avoid an economically catastrophic default.Top officials, including Ms. Yellen and the White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, have sidestepped questions about whether they believe the Constitution would compel the government to continue borrowing to pay its bills after the X-date.ABC News asked Ms. Yellen amid a debt-ceiling standoff in 2021 if she would invoke the 14th Amendment to resolve it.“It’s Congress’s responsibility to show that they have the determination to pay the bills that the government amasses,” she said. “We shouldn’t be in a position where we need to consider whether or not the 14th Amendment applies. That’s a disastrous situation that the country shouldn’t be in.”The government reached the borrowing limit on Jan. 19, but Treasury officials deployed what are known as extraordinary measures to continue paying bills on time. The measures, which are essentially accounting maneuvers, are set to run out sometime in the next few months, possibly as soon as June 1. The government would default on its debt if Treasury stopped paying all bills. Economists have warned that could lead to financial crisis and recession.Progressive groups have encouraged Mr. Biden to take actions meant to circumvent Congress on the debt limit and continue uninterrupted spending, like minting a $1 trillion coin to deposit with the Federal Reserve. Internally, administration officials have rejected most of them. Publicly, Biden aides have said the only way to avert a crisis is for Congress to act.“I know you probably get tired of me saying this from here over and over again, but it is true,” Ms. Jean-Pierre said on Thursday, after referring a question about the 14th Amendment to the Treasury Department. “It is their constitutional duty to get this done.”But inside the administration, it remains an open question what Treasury would do if Congress does not raise the limit in time — because, many officials say, the law is unclear and so is the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to tax and spend.Officials who support invoking the 14th Amendment and continuing to issue new debt contend the government would be exposed to lawsuits either way. If it fails to continue paying its bills after the X-date, it could be sued by anyone who is not paid on time in the event of a default.Other officials have argued that the statutory borrowing limit is binding, and that an attempt to ignore it would draw an immediate legal challenge that would most likely rise quickly to the Supreme Court.There is a broad consensus on both sides of the debate that the move risks roiling financial markets. It is likely to cause a surge in short-term borrowing costs because investors would demand a premium to buy debt that could be invalidated by a court.The Moody’s Analytics economist Mark Zandi modeled such a situation this year and found it would create short-term economic damage but long-term gains if courts upheld the constitutional interpretation — by removing the threat of future brinkmanship over the limit.“The extraordinary uncertainty created by the constitutional crisis leads to a sell-off in financial markets until the Supreme Court rules,” Mr. Zandi wrote in March. Economic growth and job creation would be dampened briefly, he added, “but the economy avoids a recession and quickly rebounds.”Obama administration officials considered — and quickly discarded — the constitutional theory when Republicans refused to raise the limit in 2011 unless the president agreed to spending cuts. Treasury lawyers never issued a formal opinion on the question, and they have not yet this year, department officials said this week.But in a letter to the editor of The New York Times in 2011, George W. Madison, who was Treasury’s general counsel at the time, suggested that department officials did not subscribe to the theory. He was directly challenging an assertion by the constitutional law professor Laurence H. Tribe, who wrote in an opinion essay in The Times that Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner had pushed to embrace the 14th Amendment interpretation, which Mr. Tribe opposed.“Like every previous secretary of the Treasury who has confronted the question,” Mr. Madison wrote, “Secretary Geithner has always viewed the debt limit as a binding legal constraint that can only be raised by Congress.” More

  • in

    Why the 14th Amendment Is Being Cited in the Debt Ceiling Debate

    Some Biden administration officials believe a constitutional clause prevents the United States from failing to make payments even if it means breaching the debt limit.WASHINGTON — Faced with an impasse over raising or suspending the nation’s debt limit, some White House officials are looking to a clause in the 14th Amendment to ensure the United States does not default on its debt.The amendment, adopted after the Civil War, conferred citizenship to former slaves — and contains a more obscure section on public debt. Here is a brief history of the 14th Amendment and an explanation of its provisions, including why it’s now being talked about in the White House.What does the 14th Amendment say?Considered by historians to be a milestone for civil rights, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution extended citizenship to former slaves. It also guaranteed that the right to due process and equal protection under the law applied to both federal and state governments.The expansive amendment is the most cited amendment in lawsuits, according to the Library of Congress.Section 1 of the amendment established that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside” and that “no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”Another provision, known as the Disqualification Clause, was more obscure until the events of Jan. 6, 2021. Some have argued that the clause, outlined in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, bars anyone who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” from holding public office.Now, the standoff over the national debt has renewed debate over Section 4 of the amendment, known as the public debt clause.What spurred its adoption?After the Civil War and the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, lawmakers sought to set out the terms of the Confederacy’s surrender and the rebellious states’ re-entry into the Union.The 13th Amendment’s formal abolition of slavery also meant that the size of delegations from former Confederate states would increase, even as the states passed discriminatory “Black codes” and prevented former slaves from voting. Reconstructionist Republicans in Congress sought to address these issues by passing the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed citizenship and equal protection for former slaves.Although Republicans had enough votes to override a veto by President Andrew Johnson, some remained concerned that the protections in the law were not strong or permanent enough, and began seeking a constitutional amendment.A joint committee on Reconstruction then drafted what would become the 14th Amendment, which was passed by Congress in 1866 and ratified two years later.Why does it contain a public debt clause?The 14th Amendment includes a provision that protected public debt held by the federal government, and prohibited payment of debt held by the Confederate states.“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned,” the clause reads.That section, historians say, was added because of fears that if former Confederate states were to regain political power in Congress, lawmakers might repudiate federal debts and guarantee Confederate debt. Reconstructionist Republicans also thought that the clause would discourage loans to future insurrectionists.“Southerners were used to having their way in Congress — they had dominated the institution from 1787 until secession in 1861 — and many believed that when their representatives arrived in House and Senate, they would be able to tear up the nation’s i.o.u.s. Section 4 was the response,” Garrett Epps, a legal scholar, has previously written.Why is it being discussed today?Some legal scholars contend that the public debt clause overrides the statutory borrowing limit, which is set by Congress and can be lifted or suspended only with lawmaker approval.The United States hit that cap on Jan. 19 and on Monday, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen warned that the federal government could run out of cash to pay its bills by June 1 unless it was able to borrow more money.The Biden administration is discussing whether the 14th Amendment compels the government to continue issuing new debt to pay bondholders, along with Social Security recipients, military personnel and others, even if Congress fails to lift the limit before the so-called X-date. More