Jagadeesh Gokhale offers a case for using an “ersatz U.S. debt crisis” to demonstrate the seriousness of the commitment of reform-minded lawmakers to aggressive fiscal consolidation:

Given its purpose is to avoid a real future crisis, by bringing to heel run-away spending on entitlements and other wasteful government programs, here’s an opportunity for experiment: Would a debt-limit “crisis” beget better fiscal policies?
How might investors really view this ersatz U.S. debt crisis? If some lawmakers’ refusal to vote for increasing the debt limit without also passing prudential fiscal policies resulted in a technical U.S. default, it would demonstrate their significant political strength.
Might that not actually induce investors to buy long-term U.S. debt — reducing long-term interest rates and improving the U.S. investment climate?
Indeed, investors should be fearful of the opposite: an increase in the debt limit without a serious challenge from reform-minded lawmakers. This only signals business as usual for U.S. fiscal affairs.

I don’t have enough confidence that our lawmakers, including those we’re inclined to think of as “the good guys,” are savvy enough to get this right to embrace Gokhale’s provocation, but I found it interesting nonetheless.