It’s beginning to get out on the Hill. It’s complicated, but here is the gist as I understand it: Congress authorizes in legislation the president to submit a request for an increase in the debt limit in three tranches over the next year or so, with corresponding proposals for spending cuts; when the president submits his request, Congress immediately considers a resolution of disapproval; if the resolution passes, the president can veto it and–assuming his veto is subsequently upheld–he gets the increase in the debt limit. Got it? More later…
UPDATE
From the comments:
Uncledave Wasn’t that a “Schoolhouse Rock” episode?
Tom in SFCA Why doesn’t the GOP simply “deem” the debt limit increase to have passed. That would make everything cool, wouldn’t it?
First off, I doubt that such a scheme is constitutional as it means that legislation is in effect originating in the White House, not the legislature.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSecondly, it's a hidden gotcha, the Republicans do not have enough votes to over ride a veto, so in affect this gives Obama free reign to propose anything he wants.
Exactly - although it's not really even a hidden gotcha. This is McConnell giving the Democrats what they want and hoping that Republican voters don't figure it out. McConnell has to go. It's well past time...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRE: "I doubt that such a scheme is constitutional as it means that legislation is in effect originating in the White House"
General Welfare clause and/or Interstate Commerce clause. Those things are so useful, the ShamWow dude should be pitching them on late night TV. They, apparently, have neither limits nor narrow original meanings. Sadly, you can't use them to cut tomatoes.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis sounds stupid, and purely a political procedure.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe backlash from this idiocy will put the final nail in Obama's re-election chances, and the Democrats can forget any chance of holding on to the Senate.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJust like how the Republicans let Obamacare get passed, so that they had a big issue to win elections on; that's what this is. The Republicans will let the economy lose, so that they can win elections. Meanwhile, Obama will get what he wants. Instead of the Republicans fighting to win for us, resulting in them getting elected. They are fighting to lose for us, and hoping to get elected. That's the game.
They are more scared of the entitlement class, and the entitlement sympathizer class, then voters who live a life independent of entitlements.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMarkW, yeah, its a way to vote for the debt limit inc w/o voting for a debt limit inc. some sen repubs will argue that it puts it all squarely on obama and the dems and makes obama pony up on spending cut proposals, but a lot of ppl are going to think its too cute buy half
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt's too stupid by full.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy is Jeff Sessions -- the most articulate conservative in the Senate -- NOT that tribunal's minority leader?
Why must Senate Republicans always insist on taking the most tongue-tied and squishy of its ranks to elevate as their mouthpiece?
First, they passed over Don Nickles. Now, Sessions. Decorum and seniority should be flushed down a toilet bowl, especially with the government's current fiscal mess.
The only time McConnell ever truly fought for something -- free speech -- was in opposition to McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform. He lost. Handily.
His picture is in my Miriam Webster's Collegiate dictionary to the side of the definition of "ineffective".
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy doesn't the GOP simply "deem" the debt limit increase to have passed. That would make everything cool, wouldn't it?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis does remind me of the Slaughter Rule, with its tricky unorthodox ways. I think what it comes down to is that the Republicans do not want to be the ones to cut anything.
They want all the credit and none of the blame; but of course, that's what all politicians want.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTHIS is what the GOP is willing to accept ? All it does is allow for a debt ceiling increase, without any Republicans having to ever vote for one.So, McConnell acknowledges what the grown-ups know ( that the ceiling must be raised) but he doesn't have to ask his caucus members to act like grown ups. It sure won't justify a chapter in Profiles In Courage- Volume 2.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusethe request is for both a debt increase and spending cuts ... if he vetos the disapproval Obama gets BOTH the debt increase and the spending cuts ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe critical point is that Obama gets to make the proposal.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat's to keep him from asking for a $4trillion increase in the debt limit and a $1 decrease in spending.
Then, unless congress votes by 2/3rds to block it, Obama gets what he asked for.
the initial legis will set out how much he can request each time--so he cldnt ask for $4 tril
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat's INSANE. Word is that it is dollar-for-dollar cuts to debt increase, but this means Obama and democrats get to decide UNILATERALLY what gets cut. Why on earth would republicans given them this?!? This is one of the worst ideas Mitch McConnell has ever had, and that is really saying something.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOverride a veto? How would Republicans even pass a resolution of disapproval in the Senate? Why would it even get to a veto?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat's not a plan, its a capitulation. "Too cute by half" indeed. Why??? - The GOP has the superior negotiating position. Does the Senate GOP intend to hamstring the House GOP, because that's what it appears like from here. Is there anyone who does not see through McConnell's smoke and mirrors?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"The GOP has the superior negotiating position."
Is this true? It seems the only thing that really makes the GOP superior in this scenario is their apparent willingness to shoot holes in the bottom of the boat we're ALL in, if they don't get their way.
I suppose that's a superior position - in the short run. However, there is a significant chance that this whole issue will backfire, badly, upon the GOP - for people really don't like hostage takers, and they like them even less after they've made good on their promises to shoot a hostage...
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuseso the only way to keep the boat we're all in from sinking is by digging a deeper debt hole?
How, exactly does that make any sense?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse