America's dangerous debt dance

By threatening debt default and government shutdown, Congressional Republicans are risking disaster.

The world turns, seasons come and go, the sun rises and falls, and the American government collapses into chaos at the mere mention of the possibility of passing a budget. Such is the way of things; and this week's crisis has given us just more of the dreary same, except that every time the cycle comes around again, the apocalyptic language gets dialled up a notch. Every time the band strikes up for the annual dance of President and Congress with shut-down and debt default, the music is that little bit louder, the tempo that little bit faster.

The Republican leadership in Congress - who already have a reputation for stubbornness that would make a mule blush and who sometimes act as if they really think this is all just a political dance, and not the actions of a government whose decisions affect people - truly rose to the occasion this time. They rolled out a preposterous set of demands from a long-list of Fox News talking points, including defunding Obamacare; dropping greenhouse gas and oil drilling restrictions, and the building of an expensive and controversial new oil pipeline, among others.

In the Senate, there were some fireworks: first-term Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz tried to capture the drama of a filibuster in a silly but entertaining 21-hour speaking session which saw him, among other things,
reading Green Eggs and Ham to the Senate chamber.

Majority Leader Harry Reid ended the shenanigans by calling a vote in which the Senate overwhelmingly chose (79-19 - a super-majority, above the point at which hard-line Republicans like Cruz could filibuster) to cut off debate on the legislation. Then, the Senate voted along party lines to strip Republican policy demands from the bill, and passed what amounted to a stopgap that would fund the government until the middle of November. This has now been batted back to the House of Representatives, with Reid making it clear his Senate would not vote on any budget bill with Republican demands bolted on again.

Meanwhile on Wednesday, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew sent a warning to the House of Representatives that the point at which the United States would be unable to pay its obligations - meaning a potentially catastrophic US default on debt - would be reached on October 17 if the debt ceiling, the self-imposed limit on US government borrowing, isn't raised. (The borrowing limit was actually reached in May, but the problem was put off by the imposition of the package of emergency measures known as the Sequester.)

The row over a bill to raise the debt ceiling has mirrored the row over the budget, with Republicans again demanding ideological bolt-ons; but the debt ceiling issue is the more important of the two: a government shutdown would be embarrassing and inconvenient, and might have economic implications if it went on for a while; but a US default on debt could potentially be an international financial disaster.

Why do we keep coming back here time after time? Congress have set ceiling limits to America's national debt since 1917, and have raised it without issue seventy-nine times since 1940, according to CNN's money blog. But now, partly due to a tribalisation of American politics in which the hard-line Republicans have to win points against the Democrats no matter what, and with an obstructionist Republican party in charge of the House, the debt ceiling has become a hostage with which to endlessly extract demands. Republicans counter with the argument that US debt is dangerously high. As of yesterday it stands at $16,738,443,175,473 and 97 cents, which is an impressive figure, though as a proportion of GDP it is by no means the highest among developed economies; many countries, including the UK, are higher, and Japan's is more than double that of the US.

But the Republican party is in a state of internal warfare. One one side are the moderates, who would like a conservative budget but are willing to work with Democrats on a compromise; and on the other are extremists whose loathing for the Obama administration is so great that they would risk a complete government shut-down and a US debt default to score points.

President Obama, for whom this is the fourth year that congressional Republicans have nearly forced the government into crisis, has clearly had enough. He giving a blistering speech in Washington yesterday:
“No Congress before this one has ever, ever, in history been irresponsible enough to threaten default, to threaten an economic shut-down, to suggest America not pay its bills, just to try to blackmail a President into giving them some concessions on issues that have nothing to do with a budget.”
Boehner, who is in thrall to his caucus, now has to choose between bringing the temporary measure passed by the Senate to a vote in the House, where it would probably pass with a combination of moderate Republican and Democrat votes but which would seriously undermine his position as speaker, or return Republican demands to the bill, which means continuing to face down the possibility of shutting off funding for the government, as well as ignoring the dangerous debt ceiling problem.
One ray of hope is that it is starting to look like Republican resolve is fading. “I don't want to be undercutting Boehner, but put it this way: I will not let the government shut down,” one Republican congressman, Peter King, told the New York Times. One possible alternative outcome is an even shorter-term solution than the Senate bill, one that would keep the government open just until the end of the week; keeping the music playing for just that little bit longer.
In the end, it seems that the price you pay for a governmental system composed of checks and balances is the risk of total gridlock. What America really needs is a reform of how this entire process occurs, but this is an impossible pipedream.
In the meantime, the world just has to hope that Congress can get this dance done and dusted and find a workable solution. Because at some point, the music is going to stop. And the silence will be deafening.
Senator Ted Cruz speaks to reporters after he spoke on the Senate floor for more than 21 hours. Photo:Getty.

Nicky Woolf is reporting for the New Statesman from the US. He tweets @NickyWoolf.

Show Hide image

America’s domestic terrorists: why there’s no such thing as a “lone wolf”

After the latest attack on Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs, America must confront the violence escalating at its heart.

First things first: let’s not pretend this is about life.

Three people have died and nine were injured on Friday in the latest attack on a women’s health clinic in the United States. Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs was besieged by a gunman whose motives remain unclear, but right-to-lifers—who should really be called “forced birth advocates”—have already taken up their keyboards to defend his actions, claiming that women seeking an abortion, or doctors providing them, are never “innocent”. 

This was not unexpected. Abortion providers have been shot and killed before in the United States. The recent book Living in the Crosshairs by David S Cohen and Krysten Connon describes in sanguine detail the extent of domestic terrorism against women’s healthcare facilities, which is increasing as the American right-wing goes into meltdown over women’s continued insistence on having some measure of control over their own damn bodies. As Slate reports

In July, employees at a clinic in the Chicago suburb of Aurora, Illinois, reported an attempted arson. In August, firefighters found half a burning car at the construction site of a future clinic in New Orleans. On Sept. 4, a clinic in Pullman, Washington, was set ablaze at 3:30 a.m., and on Sept. 30, someone broke a window at a Thousand Oaks, California, clinic and threw a makeshift bomb inside.

The real horror here is not just that a forced-birth fanatic attacked a clinic, but that abortion providers across America are obliged to work as if they might, at any time, be attacked by forced-birth fanatics whose right to own a small arsenal of firearms is protected by Congress. 

The United States is bristling with heavily armed right-wingers who believe the law applies to everyone but them. This is the second act of domestic terrorism in America in a week. On Monday, racists shouting the n-word opened fire at a Black Lives Matter protest in Minneapolis, injuring three. This time, the killer is a white man in his 50s. Most American domestic terrorists are white men, which may explain why they are not treated as political agents, and instead dismissed as “lone wolves” and “madmen”.

Terrorism is violence against civilians in the service of ideology. By anyone’s sights, these killers are terrorists, and by the numbers, these terrorists pose substantially more of a threat to American citizens than foreign terrorism—but nobody is calling for background checks on white men, or for members of the republican party to wear ID tags. In America, like many other western nations, people only get to be “terrorists” when they are “outsiders” who go against the political consensus. And there is a significant political consensus behind this bigotry, including within Washington itself. That consensus plays out every time a Republican candidate or Fox news hatebot expresses sorrow for the victims of murder whilst supporting both the motives and the methods of the murderers. If that sounds extreme, let’s remind ourselves that the same politicians who declare that abortion is murder are also telling their constituents that any attempt to prevent them owning and using firearms is an attack on their human rights. 

Take Planned Parenthood. For months now, systematic attempts in Washington to defund the organisation have swamped the nation with anti-choice, anti-woman rhetoric. Donald Trump, the tangerine-tanned tycoon who has managed to become the frontrunner in the republican presidential race not in spite of his swivel-eyed, stage-managed, tub-thumping bigotry but because of it, recently called Planned Parenthood an “abortion factory” and demanded that it be stripped of all state support. Trump, in fact, held a pro-choice position not long ago, but like many US republicans, he is far smarter than he plays. Trump understands that what works for the American public right now, in an absence of real hope, is fanaticism. 

Donald Trump, like many republican candidates, is happy to play the anti-woman, anti-immigrant, racist fanatic in order to pander to white, fundamentalist Christian voters who just want to hear someone tell it like it is. Who just want to hear someone say that all Muslims should be made to wear ID cards, that Black protesters deserve to be “roughed up”, that water-boarding is acceptable even if it doesn’t work because “they deserve it”. Who just want something to believe in, and when the future is a terrifying blank space, the only voice that makes sense anymore is the ugly, violent whisper in the part of your heart that hates humanity, and goddamn but it’s a relief to hear someone speaking that way in a legitimate political forum. Otherwise you might be crazy.

American domestic terrorists are not “lone wolves”. They are entrepreneurial. They may work alone or in small groups, but they are merely the extreme expression of a political system in meltdown. Republican politicians are careful not to alienate voters who might think these shooters had the right idea when they condemn the violence, which they occasionally forget to do right away. In August, a homeless Hispanic man was allegedly beaten to a pulp by two Bostonians, one of whom told the police that he was inspired by Donald Trump’s call for the deportation of “illegals”. Trump responded to the incident by explaining that “people who are following me are very passionate. They love this country and they want this country to be great again.”

But that’s not even the real problem with Donald Trump. The real problem with Donald Trump is that he makes everyone standing just to the left of him look sane. All but one republican governor has declared that refugees from Syria are unwelcome in their states. Across the nation, red states are voting in laws preventing women from accessing abortion, contraception and reproductive healthcare. Earlier this year, as congressmen discussed defunding Planned Parenthood, 300 ‘pro-life’ protesters demonstrated outside the same Colorado clinic where three people died this weekend. On a daily basis, the women who seek treatment at the clinic are apparently forced to face down cohorts of shouting fanatics just to get in the door. To refuse any connection between these daily threats and the gunman who took the violence to its logical extreme is not merely illogical—it is dangerous.

If terrorism is the murder of civilians in the service of a political ideology, the United States is a nation in the grip of a wave of domestic terrorism. It cannot properly be named as such because its logic draws directly from the political consensus of the popular right. If the killers were not white American men, we would be able to call them what they are—and politicians might be obligated to come up with a response beyond “these things happen.”

These things don’t just “happen”. These things happen with escalating, terrifying frequency, and for a reason. The reason is that America is a nation descending into political chaos, unwilling to confront the violent bigotry at its heart, stoked to frenzy by politicians all too willing to feed the violence if it consolidates their own power. It is a political choice, and it demands a political response.

Laurie Penny is a contributing editor to the New Statesman. She is the author of five books, most recently Unspeakable Things.