Debt ceiling a big question in fiscal cliff deal
December 17th, 2012
02:23 PM ET
1 year ago

Debt ceiling a big question in fiscal cliff deal

New York (CNNMoney) - With just two weeks to go before the end of the year, the fiscal cliff remains unresolved and the country's debt is just $63 billion shy of the $16.394 trillion legal borrowing limit.

House Speaker John Boehner has offered to extend the debt limit for a year as part of a deal to avoid the fiscal cliff, a source familiar with the talks told CNN on Sunday.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Debt • Fiscal Cliff • John Boehner
soundoff (24 Responses)
  1. ruraldem

    when did the gop sell out grove norquis

    December 17, 2012 02:35 pm at 2:35 pm |
  2. truth, truth and more truth

    it is a very scary proposition that obama would think he can take control of the countries debt limit as it is clearly spelled out in the constitution. i thought he taught constitutional law? sure doesn't sound like it! he doesn't not seem to grasp the concept of divided government where all the power is not placed in the hands of one branch, and especially in the hands of the president. the founding fathers didn't want another king,and we certainly don't want a dictator. obama needs to learn how to deal with the other, co-equal branches of government.

    December 17, 2012 02:40 pm at 2:40 pm |
  3. Kelby in Houston, TX

    Congress should no longer be involved with the decision to raise the debt ceiling.
    If we end up with a Democratic President and a spiteful Republican Congress again, our credit rating could take yet another hit

    December 17, 2012 02:43 pm at 2:43 pm |
  4. CommonSense 12

    Great News! Debt ceiling was raised everything Bush requested without objection...so give our president the opportunity to turn around this economy, the sinking ship Bush left us!

    December 17, 2012 02:59 pm at 2:59 pm |
  5. Somd guy

    No one party or person should have teh absolute power to raise the dept ceiling. The way that is now is working the exact way it was inteded to work. Stop spending and start cutting ....

    December 17, 2012 02:59 pm at 2:59 pm |
  6. Rudy NYC

    Since the House originates and authorizes all revenue related bills, then the House should authorize raising the debt ceiling and held liable if they do not.

    December 17, 2012 03:02 pm at 3:02 pm |
  7. Sniffit

    "it is a very scary proposition that obama would think he can take control of the countries debt limit as it is clearly spelled out in the constitution"

    Just because Obama has all the political leverage this time and is using it to push what he AND THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNTRY want, doesn't mean he's operating outside of the Constitution. Negotiating between the executive and legislative branches is working as intended. The branches themselves need some work though...starting with filibuster reform, because THAT is certainly NOT in the Constitution and its current incarnation has completely broken the elgislative branch.

    December 17, 2012 03:06 pm at 3:06 pm |
  8. Rudy NYC

    truth somebody wrote:

    it is a very scary proposition that obama would think he can take control of the countries debt limit as it is clearly spelled out in the constitution. i thought he taught constitutional law? ....
    ------------------
    Pres. Obama is an expert on constitutional law. He knows that the House originates all revenue bills, which means the House *must* come up a bill to pay for it....most especially after they've authorized the spending.

    December 17, 2012 03:06 pm at 3:06 pm |
  9. Rick McDaniel

    The debt ceiling is going to be the bigger fight, and NOT taxes.

    December 17, 2012 03:10 pm at 3:10 pm |
  10. Sniffit

    There's absolutely nothing unconstitutional about the POTUS negotiating to get the debt ceiling raised. Just because Obama happens to be the one with all the political leverage this time doesn't mean he's doing anything unconstitutional by demanding that the debt ceiling should be raised to pay for the PAST spending measures that Congress already enacted, which POTUS had to obey and spend. Were the political leverage leaning in the other direction, we wouldn't ahve to listen to the crybaby Teatroll pantwetters whine about "dictators," etc. Negotiations between the branches are working as intended, with the players' obeisance to their political constituencies and the majority's will being the sources of leverage. The branches themselves need some work though...starting with filibuster reform, because THAT is certainly NOT in the Constitution and it has completley broken the legislative branch.

    December 17, 2012 03:12 pm at 3:12 pm |
  11. marita

    The debt-ceiling should not be controlled by one person only, neither by only one branch of government! – Marita.

    December 17, 2012 03:13 pm at 3:13 pm |
  12. Fair is Fair

    Didn't it just get raised by over $2 trillion just a couple years ago?

    December 17, 2012 03:20 pm at 3:20 pm |
  13. Fair is Fair

    Kelby in Houston, TX

    Congress should no longer be involved with the decision to raise the debt ceiling.

    Rudy NYC

    Since the House originates and authorizes all revenue related bills, then the House should authorize raising the debt ceiling and held liable if they do not.
    -------
    You guys should get your stories in sync.

    December 17, 2012 03:21 pm at 3:21 pm |
  14. Rudy NYC

    Fair is Fair wrote:

    "You guys should get your stories in sync."
    -----------------
    Only right wing conservatives do that. Liberals specialize in original thought and the creative thinking process.

    By its' very definition conservatism means resistance to change, which fosters an atmosphere rot, decay and stagnation.

    December 17, 2012 03:27 pm at 3:27 pm |
  15. Sniffit

    GOP uses reconciliation to jam through the Bush tax cuts despite everyone warning of the deficit and debt problems it would create (and have now created): perfectly acceptable to the Teatrolls.

    Obama using his political leverage A/K/A MANDATE to demand the debt ceiling be raised to pay for PAST spending enacted by Congress, and the GOP/Teatrolls really struggling to find a way out or a way to get what they want out of the deal because they know they have no leverage: GOP/Teatrolls crying and bemoaning a "dictator."

    Any questions?

    BTW, "truth," did you miss all the times Obama has absoltuely refused to even acknowledge the possibility of the "14th Amendment solution" to the debt ceiling problem? Of course you haven't...you're just ignoring them intentionally so you can spout of wholely inaccurate partisan nonsense.

    December 17, 2012 03:32 pm at 3:32 pm |
  16. Sniffit

    "You guys should get your stories in sync."

    Sorry, but hivemind goose-stepping is a GOP/Teatroll thing.

    December 17, 2012 03:35 pm at 3:35 pm |
  17. Ray E. (Georgia)

    Good Lord,
    Rudy your defination of Conservatives is so out of touch even the Liberal's are rolling in the Aisles. Let me help you a bit. Say you are in a fairly good job and are making $3000.00 a month. A conservative knows they should not be spending $4000.00 per month. Nothing wrong with stretching out payments for a car for instance as long as you pay for it in time. In Washington, Paying down the National Debt isn't happening, and as you know it is increasing by a Trillion or more each year. Sooner or later that rot, and decay is going to set in. Just like the Auto Unions learned, just like the Baker's Union at Hostess learned. But there is hope. Michigan finally got smart. You??

    December 17, 2012 03:39 pm at 3:39 pm |
  18. rs

    The Debt Ceiling has nothing to do with the Fiscal Cliff, and should not be a part of that negotiation.

    All that tossing the Debt Ceiling into the Fiscal Cliff negotion does is give the GOP another chance to mess up the nation's credit rating and to generally mess up anotherwise straightforward policy fix.

    Otherwise, the House just needs to do its job- including creating the budget and paying for the the debt.

    December 17, 2012 04:05 pm at 4:05 pm |
  19. Rudy NYC

    Ray E. (Georgia) wrote:

    Good Lord, Rudy, your defination of Conservatives is so out of touch even the Liberal's are rolling in the Aisles. Let me help you a bit. Say you are in a fairly good job and are making $3000.00 a month. A conservative knows they should not be spending $4000.00 per month. ...
    ------------------–
    Actually, that definition "resistance to change" comes from Merriam-Webster. I proudly claim credit for the stylish embellishments. As for your definiton of conservatism....SMH, SMH, SMH.

    December 17, 2012 04:06 pm at 4:06 pm |
  20. ghostriter

    Ray E, you are way off. 1st off, $3000 a month before taxes is about $36,000 a year. With a family of four, you are at the poverty level. Not a good job by any means.

    The problem with conservatives isn't that they don't talk a good game. They have yet to actually follow thru. Even now, conservatives are screaming for cuts....as long as the military is not only not cut, but get even more spending. Where was your "should not be spending $4000 a month" when Romney was pushing for more military spending on stuff no one wanted?

    You conservatives are very conservative with things you don't like. Just like you guys cried like babies about Solyndra till you found out that Paul Ryan, the conservative and tea party superman, took money from the same program to give to his donors. Suddenly, the whole argument faded away. Only because you could no longer use it against Obama.

    So please spare us the fake indignation. You guys have earned 90% of the bad press you get. Not least of all because of your incessant blaming of the press for it.

    December 17, 2012 04:11 pm at 4:11 pm |
  21. rs

    Good Lord Ray E.

    You actually think it is a good thing that corporations could have the ability to not only set their rate of profitability, but to also have the ability to reduce rates of pay, do away with benefits and permanant employment ad hoc?

    How sir, do you propose to deal with the growing number of poor this anti-union, anti-worker enviroment you seek will create?

    Whats next, slavery?

    As to your simple explaination of "conservative", using your household budgeting excercise, how in the world do you explain the budgeting processes of Reagan and G.W. Bush?

    December 17, 2012 04:11 pm at 4:11 pm |
  22. Rudy NYC

    Ray E. (Georgia)

    Good Lord,
    Rudy your defination of Conservatives is so out of touch even the Liberal's are rolling in the Aisles.
    ----------------
    Yupper, rolling in the aisles, laughing TAO. Thanks for the assist.

    December 17, 2012 04:22 pm at 4:22 pm |
  23. Sniffit

    "Say you are in a fairly good job and are making $3000.00 a month. A conservative knows they should not be spending $4000.00 per month. ..."

    ===

    WRONG. Say you have a low paying "middle-class" job earning $4,000 per month and $4,000 in expenses. That is where we were in 2001 and 2003 when Bush and the GOP inexplicably went to the boss and said "please reduce my paychecks to $3,000 per month." Volunteering to lower your revenue when you are currently earning just enough to pay your bill is the epitome of "fiscal irresponsibility." No bones about it.

    December 17, 2012 04:34 pm at 4:34 pm |
  24. Sniffit

    "How sir, do you propose to deal with the growing number of poor this anti-union, anti-worker enviroment you seek will create?"

    Why, shoot them of course! "Jobless? In debt you can't pay off? Have we got the job for you! Target dummies make great salaries and have great benefits, and if you survive your first 5 bullets, you get a bonus at the end of the year!"

    December 17, 2012 04:36 pm at 4:36 pm |