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

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less