'There is no Plan B': Republicans make a daring bet on the debt limit
WASHINGTON — As Republicans barrel toward a critical deadline this summer to lift the debt ceiling, they say there's no 'Plan B' to avert an economically disastrous default if they fail to pass the massive bill for President Donald Trump's agenda in time.
Congressional Republicans are eyeing increasing the debt limit by $4 trillion to $5 trillion so the government can keep borrowing to meet the country's obligations. It's part of their broader domestic policy package, which the Senate needs to pass before it can go back through the House and ultimately to Trump's desk for his signature. And the GOP only has three votes to spare in both chambers.
'There is no Plan B,' Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Tuesday when asked by NBC News if he has a backup plan for the debt limit. 'It's Plan A. We have to get it done. Failure is not an option.'
It's a risky gamble by GOP leaders, who are putting all their chips on passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act by the debt ceiling deadline.
'We're going to get reconciliation done,' Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said when asked what the party's fallback plan is on the debt ceiling. (Reconciliation refers to the budget process Republicans are using to pass their bill, which allows them to bypass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate and cut Democrats out of the process.)
The Treasury Department has urged Congress to raise the debt ceiling "by mid-July" to safely avoid default. The Congressional Budget Office projected this week that the deadline may be later, 'between mid-August and the end of September,' although that won't be official unless the Treasury Department agrees.
If Republicans fail to pass their sprawling bill in time, they would need to negotiate with Democrats to pass a standalone debt limit extension through the 60-vote process in the Se nate.
But there have been no negotiations between party leaders on that front, according to Republican and Democratic aides with knowledge of the dynamics. One GOP aide said the party is 'full steam ahead on Plan A' and suggested there may still be time to consider a fallback if they absolutely need to.
Some Republicans say it's a deliberate tactic to drive up the urgency of passing their filibuster-proof bill.
'We should be set an expectation that we're getting this done in July, and it includes the debt ceiling,' said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. 'I think the minute you start talking about a backup plan, you're going to have a backup plan.'
If Republican leaders eventually decide they want to cut a bipartisan deal on the debt ceiling, it's unclear what — if anything — Democrats would demand.
Some, like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts, and Rep. Brendan Boyle, of Pennsylvania., have insisted on abolishing the debt limit entirely in order to prevent the full faith and credit of the United States from being used as leverage in policy negotiations. That's an idea Trump recently endorsed.
'I am very pleased to announce that, after all of these years, I agree with Senator Elizabeth Warren on SOMETHING,' Trump wrote on Truth Social last week. 'The Debt Limit should be entirely scrapped to prevent an Economic catastrophe.'
But there's scant support within the GOP for it, as Republicans have found success using it to extract concessions from Democratic presidents in the past.
There's no indication that Democrats would respond in kind this year if Republicans came to them and asked for their votes on the debt ceiling.
'I'm not debating hypotheticals,' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said when asked what he'd want in exchange.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
31 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's policies could have a major impact on your credit score. Here's how
Your support helps us to tell the story Read more Support Now From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference. Read more President Donald Trump returned to the White House this January with a flurry of sweeping orders – some of which may impact Americans' credit scores. Trump and his allies are set on enacting his 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' which would add trillions to the country's already sizable deficit and drive up interest rates, producing large-scale macroeconomic repercussions. Financial markets have already warned of the rising debt, with Moody's cutting its pristine 'Aaa' U.S. credit rating, which could take even further hits if the deficit continues to rise. To help pay for the bill, Republicans are looking to make cuts to Medicaid and food assistance programs, without which, more Americans are likely to go into medical debt. Some 15 million Americans with medical debt may suffer even greater consequences of Trump's policies after his administration paused a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rule that would ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. As of now, medical debt can be included in credit scores and a significant amount of medical bills can drag down a credit score. A lower credit score means a person appears to be a bigger risk to a lender, such as a bank. That could lead to higher interest rates on loans, such as for a car or a home. open image in gallery President Donald Trump's spending bill will have far-reaching macroeconomic repercussions and likely impact Americans' credit scores. ( AP ) A Biden-era rule would have removed $49 million in medical debt from credit score records, but new leadership at CFPB appointed by Trump is attempting to reverse its course, NPR reported. In addition to the complete switch in its stance, the CFPB joined forces with plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit trying to stop the Biden ban. The rule has since been stuck in limbo, with Judge Sean Jordan from Texas' Eastern District federal court twice ordering a stay, delaying the rule's new start date until the end of July. The outcome of the lawsuit will have tremendous financial implications for millions of Americans whose medical debt has negatively impacted their credit scores. Meanwhile, consumer advocates have been speaking out on behalf of the medical debt rule, worried abandoning it would take away necessary consumer protections. "I'm disappointed for the 15 million Americans who have medical bills on their credit reports and have to suffer the consequences of poor credit scores because of it," Patricia Kelmar, senior director of health care campaigns at the U.S. PIRG Education Fund, told USA Today. open image in gallery Trump-appointed CFPB leaders is looking to reverse a Biden-era rule that would ban the inclusion of medical debt on credit reports. ( Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. ) In the lawsuit filed in April, CFPB along with plaintiffs, the Consumer Data Industry Association and the Cornerstone Credit Union League, asked the judge to abandon the medical debt rule 'because it exceeds the bureau's statutory authority.' "We believe that Congress is the only one who can act on this and determine whether or not it can be on the credit report," Dan Smith, CEO and president of the Consumer Data Industry Association, told NPR. "Our intention here is to protect the credit reporting system. To ensure that it is as complete and accurate as possible," he said. In the lawsuit, the groups also note that the three largest credit bureaus - Experian, TransUnion and Equifax – no longer list paid medical debts, unpaid medical debts less than a year old and medical debts less than $500. Americans' credit scores may also see some changes thanks to a proposal from Trump that would cap credit card interest rates at 10 percent – a significant reduction from the current average interest rate of about 21 percent. Lower rates mean people would be able to pay back credit card bills quicker, and improve their credit scores by having less debt. The proposal was touted as a solution to the debt many Americans owe due to high credit card interest rates, Newsweek reported. open image in gallery Americans held $45 billion more in credit card debt in 2024 than in 2023. ( Getty Images/iStockphoto ) Americans held $1.21 trillion in credit card debt as of December 2024 – an increase of $45 billion from September 2024, per New York Fed data. Data also shows that 7.18 percent of U.S. credit card debt is in serious delinquency, likely causing many credit scores to take a serious downward spiral. Following Trump's campaign promise, Reps Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Ny) and Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla) introduced legislation to cap credit card interest rates at a maximum of 10 percent. The measure would take the financial burden away from consumers, especially those with high-interest debt. The cap would last until January 1, 2031, according to the bill.
Reuters
35 minutes ago
- Reuters
Effort to strip Fed of interest paying power seen likely to bring upheaval to markets
NEW YORK, June 12 (Reuters) - A Republican senator's plan to take away the Federal Reserve's power to pay banks interest on cash they park on central bank books could cause chaos for monetary policy implementation if it were implemented, market participants said. In recent days, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas has been speaking about this power and his desire to see it ended as part of what he views as an effort to save money by the federal government. Stripping the Fed of the longstanding power would save the government $1 trillion, Cruz said in a CNBC interview last week. The senator said then that he did not know if it was likely his effort would work but that it was certainly possible. On Wednesday, Bloomberg, opens new tab reported that Cruz had also lobbied President Donald Trump, who has long been at odds with the Fed, as well as Republican colleagues, about his idea. 'We're agonizing trying to find a $50 billion cut here and there. This is over a trillion dollars, big dollars in savings,' Cruz told Bloomberg, saying of the payments, 'half of it is going to foreign banks, which makes no sense.' Cruz's office did not respond to a request for comment. The Fed declined to comment. Cruz's effort is being treated cautiously by Senator Tim Scott, the Republican from South Carolina who chairs the Senate Finance Committee. "While the desire to return to pre-crisis monetary policy operating procedures is understandable," the matter must be considered under normal Senate procedures, Scott said in a statement. Any move on this must start with a hearing, Scott said, adding, "this is not a decision to be rushed – it must be carefully considered and openly debated." The Fed's power to pay banks interest, granted by Congress, took effect in 2008 as the financial crisis dawned. It quickly gained prominence as part of a large-scale overhaul of the monetary policy architecture, as the Fed confronted the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression. As it now stands, the Fed pays deposit-taking banks 4.4% for reserves. It uses another tool called the reverse repo facility to take in cash from money market funds and others, paying them 4.25%. Together, the two rates are designed to keep the federal funds rate, the central bank's main tool for influencing the economy, within the desired range. Paying financial firms for de facto loans of cash is essential for interest rate control due to the very large amount of liquidity created by bond buying stimulus efforts. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Fed more than doubled the size of its balance sheet to a peak of $9 trillion, with asset purchases providing support to the economy beyond what the then near-zero short-term rates could deliver. If the Fed did not have the power to pay interest on deposits, the still substantial amount of liquidity sloshing around in markets would prevent it from controlling short-term rates. That said, concerns have long existed, even among some former central bankers, that paying banks money to deposit cash at the Fed is effectively a subsidy to banks. The other issue with paying interest on reserves is that it has led the Fed into an unprecedented period of loss-making. The Fed has been operating in the red because the interest rate it now has in place outstrips the income it earns off bonds it owns. Most analysts expect the loss-making to occur for some time to come. Fed losses mean that it is not handing over profits back to the Treasury, as it is required to do when it is in the green. Sums handed back to the Treasury over recent years contributed modestly to lowering deficits. Experts believe Cruz's plan would completely fail to achieve its goals and would instead cause huge upheaval in money markets. Barclays Capital economists said on Tuesday that ending the power would simply push the cash into the reverse repo facility, which means the central bank would still be paying lots of interest to financial firms, thus negating any deficit savings. J.P. Morgan strategists said in a note last week that under Cruz's plan, 'the Fed's ability to control money market rates may be compromised, complicating its efforts to guide broader financial conditions via the fed funds rate and other money market rates.'
NBC News
38 minutes ago
- NBC News
Sen. Alex Padilla is forcibly removed from DHS Secretary Kristi Noem's news conference in Los Angeles
Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., was forcibly removed from a news conference in Los Angeles on Thursday after trying to question Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem during a press conference related to immigration. "I am Sen. Alex Padilla. I have questions for the secretary," Padilla said to Noem, which prompted several men to physically push him out of the room. It was unclear who the men were, as several were dressed in plain clothes. Padilla's office shared a video of the incident with NBC News. The video shows Padilla being taken into a hallway outside and pushed face forward onto the ground as officers with FBI-identifying vests told the senator to put his hands behind his back. The officers then handcuffed him. President Donald Trump's immigration policies — and the administration's handling of demonstrations against those policies — have sparked an outcry in recent days. After protesters clashed with officers from Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Los Angeles on Friday, the president deployed members of the National Guard, and later Marines, to assist local law enforcement. Dozens of demonstrations have taken place across the country in the days that followed. Speaking to reporters later Thursday, Padilla said he was receiving a briefing from military officials when he learned Noem was in the same building and decided to join her briefing. "I was there peacefully," he said. "At one point, I had a question, and so I began to ask a question. I was almost immediately forcibly removed from the room, I was forced to the ground, and I was handcuffed." He added, "If this is how this administration responds to a senator with a question, if this is how the Department of Homeland Security responds to a senator with a question, you can only imagine what they're doing to farmworkers, to cooks, to day laborers out in the Los Angeles community and throughout California and throughout the country.' DHS responded on X, falsely claiming that Padilla "interrupted a live press conference without identifying himself." Noem made the same false allegation during an interview on Fox News. "Mr. Padilla was told repeatedly to back away and did not comply with officers' repeated commands," DHS said, claiming that agents "thought he was an attacker and officers acted appropriately. Secretary Noem met with Senator Padilla after and held a 15 minute meeting." Before Padilla began questioning Noem, she spoke to reporters about the administration's actions, the subject of her appearance in Los Angeles. Noem said that DHS and its agencies, as well as the military, "will continue to sustain and increase our operations in this city," she said. "We are not going away," she said. "We are staying here to liberate this city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country," she said, referring to California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats. As Padilla tried to question her, Noem spoke over the senator, "I want to say thank you to every single person," and he was removed from the room. The incident provoked further outrage from Democrats. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., denounced the incident on the Senate floor. "I just saw something that sickened my stomach — the manhandling of a United States senator. We need immediate answers to what the hell went on," he said. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the state's other senator, wrote on X that Padilla "represents the best of the Senate. The disgraceful and disrespectful conduct of DHS agents, pushing and shoving him out of a briefing like that, demands our condemnation. He will not be silenced or intimidated. His questions will be answered. I'm with Alex." Newsom said in a post on X that Padilla "is one of the most decent people I know." "This is outrageous, dictatorial, and shameful. Trump and his shock troops are out of control. This must end now," he added. Former Vice President Kamala Harris called the incident "a shameful and stunning abuse of power." Republicans, meanwhile, criticized Padilla over the episode. "Padilla didn't want answers; he wanted attention," White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said. "Padilla embarrassed himself and his constituents with this immature, theater-kid stunt." Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said that what his Democratic colleague "ought to be doing, in my view, is making sure that we have rational immigration policy. And Sen. Padilla, who's a nice man, sat on the sidelines for four years, watch the border completely be blown apart.' The incident follows a string of arrests of Democratic elected officials related to immigration. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka was arrested last month for allegedly trespassing at an ICE facility in New Jersey. The charges were ultimately dropped, but he has sued interim U.S. Attorney Alina Habba over the incident and Ricky J. Patel, a special agent in charge of the Newark division of Homeland Security Investigations. Earlier this week, Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., was indicted on federal charges that stemmed from the same confrontation with law enforcement.
