republicans threaten default 4 29

The Republicans in Congress are threatening to make the US default on its obligations, and this action would have severe consequences. They are cutting funding to the most vulnerable Americans while maintaining tax cuts for the wealthy and attempting to delete funding to the IRS, which allows the rich to continue dodging to pay their fair share. Additionally, they want to cut the US government's attempts to mitigate the pending climate crisis. The modern GOP is attempting to gaslight many Americans, particularly low-information voters.

Defaulting on US debt would have significant economic consequences domestically and globally, including increased interest rates, weakening of the US dollar, global financial instability, and damage to the US's credit rating. On the other hand, drastically cutting social spending could have negative consequences, including increased poverty and inequality, reduced economic growth, and increased social unrest.

Increasing the debt limit at the current moment is critical to avoiding the economic damage that could result from defaulting on US debt. While concerns about the national debt and responsible spending are valid, it is essential to address these issues to prioritize economic stability and the well-being of all Americans.

If the US were to default on its debt, emergency spending cuts would be necessary to balance the budget. Some potential areas that could be targeted for cuts include Social Security, Medicare, defense spending, infrastructure spending, and education spending. However, emergency spending cuts would significantly impact the economy. They could lead to job losses, reduced economic growth, and other negative consequences. -- Robert Jennings

You can read the entire bill for yourself here. 

Leader Jeffries' Remarks on the Default on America Act

innerself subscribe graphic

The U.S. national debt has ballooned over time. Various events have contributed to this growth: reduced federal revenue, increased government spending, or both. The Reagan tax cuts in the 1980s lowered individual and corporate income tax rates, decreasing federal revenue and contributing to the debt's growth. The Bush tax cuts in the early 2000s further reduced income tax rates, leading to a significant drop in federal revenue. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan added to the debt by increasing defense and military spending, primarily funded through deficit spending.

Under President Trump, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 reduced income tax rates, reducing federal revenue even more. The combination of decreased revenue and increased government spending in areas such as defense contributed to the growing national debt during his tenure. Although it is challenging to provide an exact figure for the total impact of these events on the national debt, rough estimates suggest that the combined effects could be at least half of the current national debt.

It is important to note that these are approximate figures. The impact on the national debt could be higher or lower due to changes in economic conditions and policy decisions. Nonetheless, these events demonstrate how these revenue decreases or spending increases without corresponding offsets lead to borrowing and increasing national debt.  -- Robert Jennings

Powell Says Fed Can't Help If Debt Ceiling Isn't Raised

Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell says if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling, the Fed can't protect the economy from the ramifications. He speaks before the Senate Banking Committee.


The 14th Amendment to the Constitution states that the validity of the U.S. public debt "shall not be questioned," which some interpret as a mandate to honor the government's financial obligations. In addition, the debt ceiling has been criticized for being an ineffective and arbitrary tool for controlling government spending.

During times of crisis, the President must act quickly and decisively to protect the well-being and safety of the American people. This may require taking actions that are not explicitly authorized by existing laws or that are controversial. However, in such situations, the President has a duty to prioritize the public's welfare over legal or political considerations.

Of course, it is essential to consider the legal implications of any actions taken in response to a crisis. And after the immediate danger has passed, there will be time for debates and discussions about the legality and propriety of the President's actions. However, during the crisis, the priority must be to find the best solutions and minimize harm to the public. Ultimately, the President must protect the public's well-being in times of crisis.  But make no mistake this is a Republican self-induced crisis for want of political power rather than good governance. -- Robert Jennings


About the Author

jenningsRobert Jennings is co-publisher of with his wife Marie T Russell. He attended the University of Florida, Southern Technical Institute, and the University of Central Florida with studies in real estate, urban development, finance, architectural engineering, and elementary education. He was a member of the US Marine Corps and The US Army having commanded a field artillery battery in Germany. He worked in real estate finance, construction and development for 25 years before starting in 1996.

InnerSelf is dedicated to sharing information that allows people to make educated and insightful choices in their personal life, for the good of the commons, and for the well-being of the planet. InnerSelf Magazine is in its 30+year of publication in either print (1984-1995) or online as Please support our work.

 Creative Commons 4.0

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 License. Attribute the author Robert Jennings, Link back to the article This article originally appeared on

Additional Information

The US Debt-Ceiling Debate Is Nonsense

In recent years, the debt ceiling has become a contentious issue between Congress and the White House. It has resulted in multiple showdowns and a threat of default by the US government. Image ...

The Economic Meaning of the Wizard of Oz

The moral of "The Wizard of Oz" is that Americans have always had the power to control their money and economy. 

The US Is Seriously Wasting Its Poverty Tax Dollars. Why?

The United States has a higher rate of poverty than other advanced democracies. This has led to a situation where many people struggle to make ends meet, despite working and living in a wealthy country. ...