Lew Urges Congress To Raise The Debt Ceiling That Treasury Ignores

0 Shares
uncle sam holding a wad of cash

On May 17, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner saying that Treasury was set to begin implementing a “standard set of extraordinary measures” to allow borrowing and spending even after the Nation reached its legal debt limit.

Now, a recent Daily Treasury Statement makes clear just what Lew meant: Treasury would cook the books and make it appear as though the debt is holding steady. In fact, for the past 70 days the Federal debt hasn’t changed from exactly $16,699,396,000,000.00, according to Treasury records, despite continued sales of bills, notes and bonds for more than they can be redeemed.

The amount Treasury has reported for Federal debt is a mere $25 million below the debt ceiling imposed by Congress, which, if reached, should force a government shutdown.

Over the past 70 days, Treasury has made a number of moves that should have changed the Federal debt number. By July 26, according to Treasury statements, the government had redeemed nearly $6,128,368,000,000.00 in bills, notes and bonds during this fiscal year. At the same time, Treasury sold an additional $6,759,148,000,000.00 bills, note and bonds. That would equate to a net debt increase for the fiscal year.

According to an analysis of Treasury records by CNS, the value of U.S. Treasury debt instruments circulating in the public has increased $53.267 billion since May 17, meaning the debt limit has been surpassed with no consequence to government spending.

On Sunday, Lew made the rounds on news talk shows to urge Congress not to repeat the 2011 standoff over increasing the debt ceiling because the “confrontations and false crises” is bad for the American economy.

“Let’s remember, we hit the debt ceiling in May,” Lew said. “We’ve been using extraordinary measures since May to pay our bills. We’ll do that for as long as we can.”

Republicans lawmakers say a debt ceiling increase should be accompanied by major spending cuts that can reduce the Nation’s debt and are expected to use the Sept. 30 debt ceiling deadline to leverage cuts.

But, maybe Lew is right. Does the political theater even matter if the Republicans inevitably rollover and fail to force meaningful spending cuts and the debt limit isn’t a limit at all?

Sam Rolley

Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After covering community news and politics, Rolley took a position at Personal Liberty Media Group where could better hone his focus on his true passions: national politics and liberty issues. In his daily columns and reports, Rolley works to help readers understand which lies are perpetuated by the mainstream media and to stay on top of issues ignored by more conventional media outlets.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • Dave

    We need to save money… I have a perfect solution

    http://visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2010/02/17/federal-taxes-paidreceived-for-each-state

    Lets look at this chart, any state that receives more money back from the fed gov needs to have their pork revoked.
    Notice the leaching states are by far on the conservative side of the spectrum. But conservatives don’t want to view that reality.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      More Liberal Progressive misinformation, but what else have we come to expect from Dave?
      http://reason.org/news/show/the-redblue-paradox
      http://mises.org/daily/1677

      Our failing country isn’t a Republican/Democrat problem. It’s a Big Government problem. It’s a Progressive problem.

      • Dave

        My information is factual… mises? Not so much…. they use 2002 data while mine uses 2010 data (more relevant) mises goes on to make excuses for the “taker” conservative states and referencing the civil war era nonsense.

        DaveH, the war is over, the South lost and rightly so. I am sure African Americans are glad the south lost too but mises reduces that part of the war as racists tend to do….

        Mises says:

        “While such investments are made today in most every state, they take on added importance in the red states where the anti-Washington culture is based on a history of being independent from it. It is no surprise that all of the top ten net tax consuming states achieved statehood sometime after the establishment of a United States, or that five of the top ten net tax paying states were also members of the original 13 colonies.”
        How is this not conjecture? the writer makes ZERO references to logical study to come to this civil war era conclusion.
        It could never be that conservatives say one thing but do another could it? nah… All those takers are really neo-cons right DaveH? Consevatives are never wrong, they are perfect and it is it all liberal/progressives that are the problem.
        See I know your pat answer to everything.

        • Dave

          And it was conservatives like Nixon, Reagan and Bush 1 and 2 that greatly increased the size of Gov so looks like your side’s ideology has a issue with expanding the size of Gov.

          http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/25/news/economy/obama_government/index.htm

          http://mises.org/daily/895

          maybe you will believe this one…^

          http://www.politicususa.com/2011/08/24/big-government-obama-reagan.html
          But you will find a way to excuse conservative behavior and their record won’t you?

          • Dave

            Looks like the only mis-informer here is you DaveH.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Do you really think the readers are ignorant enough to fall for your lies, Dave?
            Those readers, who might wonder what would motivate Dave to persistently come on this board to spread his Propaganda poison, should read this:
            http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/beware-the-psychopath-my-son/

          • Dave

            Where are my lies DaveH. Be specific. I just don’t agree with your theory and propaganda and I have history on my side. You have a theory that has never existed in the modern industrial global economic world. The United States became a super-power through a combination of capitalistic and socialistic policy. Deal with reality for once in your life.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            It is you who is trying to make this a partisan issue, Dave, not me. I know that both Democrat Leaders and Republican Leaders are mostly Mercantilist Big Government Lovers.
            And your continued ignorance about the difference between “conservatives” and Republicans who are mostly Neoconservatives has become very trite. I would think you could come up with some new material instead of misusing labels like you typically do.
            If I was as ignorant as you, Dave, I’d be ashamed to comment on this board.

          • Dave

            Lol… You are the one that blames EVERTHING on liberals and progressives. You can’t play that game now that you are somehow above the fray. You and your boss are neck deep in it. You are as ignorant as you are a willful propagandist.

          • vicki

            ad hominem. pretty much the entire comment.

          • Dave

            Vicki, your selective monitoring of who is attacking and who’s arguements are valid has been boring for a long time now…
            You are an expert in nothing… not in ad hominem attacks, history, pretty much anything… you are a 2nd Amendment proponent and a conservative… your biases are well documented… thats why you never correct DaveH’s ad hominems, JeffH’s prove by bald assertions etc.

          • vicki

            Dave writes:

            You are an expert in nothing… not in ad hominem attacks, history, pretty much anything…

            Ad hominem.

            …..you never correct DaveH’s ad hominems, JeffH’s prove by bald assertions etc.Ad hominem.

            I don’t COMMENT, not correct cause it is not my problem. Do your own comments about their ad hominems and quit expecting others to do it for you.
            .

          • Dave

            I’ll see your ad hominem and raise you a partisan huckster

          • vicki

            Just for the education of the audience please quote what you think is the ad hominem in my statement?

          • BALONEY TONEY MAHONEY

            I liked Ralph Kramden’s arguments when he was flustered the best!!!:It left him & you speechless!!

            HOMINA, HOMINA, HOMINA,!!!!!!!

          • Ringgo1

            Actually, if you were as ignorant as Dave, you wouldn’t have the sense to NOT comment. Sadly, Dave also has no shame or lack of ego strength, so Dave just keeps on… Ha!

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Dave says — “My information is factual… mises? Not so much…. they use 2002 data while mine uses 2010 data (more relevant) mises goes on to make excuses for the “taker” conservative states and referencing the civil war era nonsense”.
          How lame. For one thing Veronica’s article was 2011 compared to your article 2010. As if the year of data would make any difference in factuality anyway. Also, human action is timeless. No matter how much we progress technologically, our behavior remains the same.
          Speaking of human action, those seeking knowledge should read this:
          http://mises.org/Books/humanaction.pdf
          Dave, who constantly disses Free Markets because he says they never existed (they did), would happily take us back to the dark ages where innovation was abhorred.
          Similarly, he would have the reader believe that our problems are a partisan issue when in fact both major parties are at fault.
          The civil war “nonsense” was a reference to typical Government action, which again is timeless, of buying off those states which aren’t already on their side. You know, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. A little over Dave’s head to be sure.

          Dave says — “I am sure African Americans are glad the south lost too but mises reduces that part of the war as racists tend to do”.
          Slander, lies, and ignorance all in one sentence.There is nothing “racist” in the article, and “mises” did not write the article, numbnuts, Christopher Westley did.
          In fact, contrary to Dave’s Propaganda, the Blacks were not benefited by the actions of the North. Most of the other industrialized countries had already freed their slaves peacefully and they blended into their respective societies much quicker than they have in the US due to self-centered US politicians using them as pawns and creating resentment in the process. Anybody who wants to know the truth about Lincoln and his so-called “emancipation” should read this book:
          http://www.amazon.com/Forced-into-Glory-Abraham-Lincolns/dp/0874850851
          One would think you Liberal Progressives would give up trying to spread your lies and Propaganda on this board, Dave, where the average reader is wise to your childish manipulative techniques.

          • Dave

            Once again, you lie… I have nothing against free markets if there could be such a thing in a global economy with multiple governments and currencies.

            But also, free markets as you define them are do not have a morality clause, they don’t know right from wrong and corporation’s very origins are to allow people to escape responsibility when things go bad.

            Sorry DaveH, you read about business from a very biased point of view. I live it.

          • BALONEY TONEY MAHONEY

            What about governments & their lack of morality? I’ll take my chances with the corporations, but corporations that are free of govt. interference!

          • vicki

            Truly free corporations can’t force us to buy a product. Governments (obamacare) can and do.

          • BALONEY TONEY MAHONEY

            Excellent point, my good woman….like Obummer did with free contraceptives!!

          • vicki

            Though I was referring to the insurance mandate you are also correct that we are forced to buy contraceptives for other people.

          • BALONEY TONEY MAHONEY

            As the wonderful Charles Krauthammer said, “Since when does a sitting president have the power to authorize a business to give out stuff (contraceptives) for free?”

            Except, they’re not free, because they just raise the rates!

          • Dave

            Except, once again you spout mis-information. If you have insurance, you keep what you have and everything continues… The only people who much buy insurance are those that can afford to do so… its called being a responsible member of society. Having to buy car insurance is mandatory as set by the state in many locations. Its the same thing.
            Corporations can monopolize industries… Like gas… or like Walmart in rural areas… You don’t have much choice but to use them.

          • vicki

            Dave writes to TheOriginalDaveH:

            Once again, you lie…

            Ad hominem and proof by bald assertion in a single statement.

            free markets as you define them are do not have a morality clause, they don’t know right from wrong….

            Governments (example: most any government on the planet) don’t have a morality clause. And by the actions of their agents don’t know right from wrong either.

            ….and corporation’s very origins are to allow people to escape responsibility when things go bad.

            No individuals can escape responsibility when things go wrong. They may not be punished the way YOU want but they do suffer. And if there is actual criminal conduct (theft, murder, extortion (the real one), the individuals are held responsible and face the criminal justice system.

            Sorry DaveH, you read about business from a very biased point of view. I live it.

            Argument from authority.

          • Dave

            Vicki,
            The morality clause is called the US Consititution… You should read and understand it sometime…

          • momo

            Like the government follows the constitution.

          • vicki

            Though the US Constitution is a set of limits on government, it is a contract and not a morality clause.

          • vicki

            Though the US Constitution is a set of limits on government, it is a contract and not a morality clause.

          • Ringgo1

            You rock. Shut his @zz down but good!

          • Dave

            To an idiot like you… but then you DaveH, Vicki, JeffH are all part of the same circle je*k so it comes as no surprise.

          • Ringgo1

            Right. Just keep up parroting your nonsense. It is no surprise that you would come up with the idea of a circle je#k. That is no doubt your default position. Enjoy, as no doubt you will…

          • Ringgo1

            Right. Just keep up parroting your nonsense. It is no surprise that you would come up with the idea of a circle je#k. That is no doubt your default position. Enjoy, as no doubt you will…

          • vicki

            Dave demonstrates the fine art of ad hominem by writing:

            To an idiot like you… but then you DaveH, Vicki, JeffH are all part of the same circle je*k so it comes as no surprise.

            I don’t think he has a clue how bad it makes his position appear to those whom he might hope to persuade.

          • Ringgo1

            Dave, you appear to be truly a moron. Wake up.

          • Dave

            #1 on the debate team eh MENSA candidate? Why don’t you and other morons like you move to Somalia where taxes are low and Gov interference is minimal.

    • vicki

      How about we revoke ALL the pork for any state.

    • FreedomFighter

      Raise the debt ceiling — Just say to the money drug
      Laus DeoSemper FI

      • FreedomFighter

        NO
        Laus DeoSemper FI