Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The debt ceiling as a hostage negotiation

The debt ceiling as a hostage negotiation
Getty Images

Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

The United States has a clearly defined process for deciding how much money the federal government spends. The House and Senate create their own budget resolutions, which must be negotiated and merged and then both houses must pass a single version of each funding bill. Congress sends the approved funding bills to the president to sign or veto.


Sounds simple doesn’t it?

Unfortunately, given the partisanship that divides Congress and the resulting dysfunction, budgets are rarely agreed upon and most often Congress shirks their responsibility by passing continuing resolutions. These resolutions are temporary spending bills that allow federal government operations to continue when final appropriations have not been approved by Congress and the president. Without final appropriations or a continuing resolution (CR), there could be a lapse in funding that results in a possible government shutdown.

Congress has only completed this process before the beginning of the fiscal year three times in the last 47 years, most recently for FY1997. I know that is hard to believe so I will restate it: Congress has only passed a budget before the beginning of the fiscal year three times in the last 47 years.

Fast forward to today and the ongoing debate as Republicans threaten to vote against raising the debt ceiling unless Democrats give in to spending cuts and you have a new level of Congressional dysfunction even more threatening than the continuing resolution passing the buck operating system.

The metaphors abound. It’s like threatening your family every month on whether to pay-off your credit card bill because you spent too much, rather than deciding on how much to spend in advance, or the most recent metaphor of a hostage negotiation. And of course, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy has his own metaphor about raising the debt ceiling being like raising your child’s credit card limit every month when he or she overspends, rather than sitting down to discuss a change in behavior.

Let’s forget the metaphors and just address the question at hand. It is time that Congress and the President have in depth intelligent discussions and debates on fiscal responsibility and long-term spending needs and obligations outside of the question of defaulting on our debt by not raising the debt limit. The alternative is an event that would cause turmoil in the financial markets with consequences that no one can predict.

And so while Congress refuses to debate the critically important question of

budgeting and national spending priorities, we will do so at The Fulcrum. Today we offer two compelling pieces of content to help illustrate the debt ceiling debate, including the 2024 budget for the U.S. government from The White House and related analysis from the Committee for a Responsible Budget.

Read More

Latino Voters in Reading Reassess Trump’s First Year

Pennsylvania Vote Map

Getty Images

Latino Voters in Reading Reassess Trump’s First Year

Reading, Pennsylvania — the majority‑Latino city that helped shape the outcome of the 2024 presidential election — is once again a bellwether for how Latino voters are responding to President Donald Trump’s first year back in office. Earlier this year, as part of The 50: Voices of a Nation series, The Fulcrum reported that Reading’s residents were motivated by economic anxiety, immigration concerns, and frustration with political rhetoric. Nine months later, those same issues remain at the forefront — but the mood has shifted.

- YouTube youtu.be

Keep ReadingShow less
The concept of AI hovering among the public.

Panic-driven legislation—from airline safety to AI bans—often backfires, and evidence must guide policy.

Getty Images, J Studios

Beware of Panic Policies

"As far as human nature is concerned, with panic comes irrationality." This simple statement by Professor Steve Calandrillo and Nolan Anderson has profound implications for public policy. When panic is highest, and demand for reactive policy is greatest, that's exactly when we need our lawmakers to resist the temptation to move fast and ban things. Yet, many state legislators are ignoring this advice amid public outcries about the allegedly widespread and destructive uses of AI. Thankfully, Calandrillo and Anderson have identified a few examples of what I'll call "panic policies" that make clear that proposals forged by frenzy tend not to reflect good public policy.

Let's turn first to a proposal in November of 2001 from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). For obvious reasons, airline safety was subject to immense public scrutiny at this time. AAP responded with what may sound like a good idea: require all infants to have their own seat and, by extension, their own seat belt on planes. The existing policy permitted parents to simply put their kid--so long as they were under two--on their lap. Essentially, babies flew for free.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) permitted this based on a pretty simple analysis: the risks to young kids without seatbelts on planes were far less than the risks they would face if they were instead traveling by car. Put differently, if parents faced higher prices to travel by air, then they'd turn to the road as the best way to get from A to B. As we all know (perhaps with the exception of the AAP at the time), airline travel is tremendously safer than travel by car. Nevertheless, the AAP forged ahead with its proposal. In fact, it did so despite admitting that they were unsure of whether the higher risks of mortality of children under two in plane crashes were due to the lack of a seat belt or the fact that they're simply fragile.

Keep ReadingShow less
Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability
campbells chicken noodle soup can

Beyond Apologies: Corporate Contempt and the Call for Real Accountability

Most customers carry a particular image of Campbell's Soup: the red-and-white label stacked on a pantry shelf, a touch of nostalgia, and the promise of a dependable bargain. It's food for snow days, tight budgets, and the middle of the week. For generations, the brand has positioned itself as a companion to working families, offering "good food" for everyday people. The company cultivated that trust so thoroughly that it became almost cliché.

Campbell's episode, now the subject of national headlines and an ongoing high-profile legal complaint, is troubling not only for its blunt language but for what it reveals about the hidden injuries that erode the social contract linking institutions to citizens, workers to workplaces, and brands to buyers. If the response ends with the usual PR maneuvers—rapid firings and the well-rehearsed "this does not reflect our values" statement. Then both the lesson and the opportunity for genuine reform by a company or individual are lost. To grasp what this controversy means for the broader corporate landscape, we first have to examine how leadership reveals its actual beliefs.

Keep ReadingShow less
As the Earth Rumbles, the Sky Calls, LaLu, the Eagle, Wants To Speak!

A reflection on freedom, democracy, and moral courage in America, urging citizens to stand up before our values fly away.

Getty Images, James Gilbert

As the Earth Rumbles, the Sky Calls, LaLu, the Eagle, Wants To Speak!

As a professional dancer, I’ve always been grounded, but the earth is rumbling, and I am uncharacteristically unsteady. I’m not alone in this feeling. Shifting cultural values are rattling our sense of moral integrity. Unfathomable words (calling a congresswoman and the people “garbage”), acts of cruelty (killing survivors stranded in the ocean), or calling a journalist “piggy,” are playfully spun as somehow normal. Our inner GPS systems are not able to locate the center.

I’m climbing trees these days in order to get up off the earth. At the age of 74, it is frankly exhilarating – I am more cognizant of the danger, so I must be attentive. All my senses are buzzing as I negotiate the craggy shape of a giant, catalpa tree. I settle into a large, gently curving limb, which hugs my body like a nest. My cries enter the vastness of the universe, and the birds sing me to sleep. I’m trying to locate myself again. Dreams are vivid up in the air.

Keep ReadingShow less