It shouldn’t be shocking that boosting the debt limit is quickly shaping up to be one of the most difficult issues confronting the Republican trifecta that’s running Washington. And that became clear in the Oval Office Tuesday.
Raising the federal government’s borrowing cap was a central part of the conversation between Speaker Mike Johnson, Senate Majority Leader John Thune and President Donald Trump at the White House.
Here’s the situation: A number of top House and Senate Republicans think it’s clever to attach the debt-limit increase to any disaster aid bill to address the deadly California wildfires. This strategy has drawn Trump’s attention.
House Democrats will oppose this, and it seems unlikely that Thune can get 60 votes for such a bill in the Senate.
Yet Trump, Thune and Johnson have limited options for raising the debt limit. There’s no more politically charged vote for Republicans, as demonstrated in December when 38 House Republicans bucked Trump and Johnson by voting against a government-funding bill that included a debt-limit boost.
Putting the debt-limit provision in reconciliation looks to be off the table because it would cost Republican votes. The margins will already be very tight on this GOP-only package — or packages.
That leaves inserting the debt limit into any broader government funding bill, which needs to pass by March 14. But the downside of this move is that it would shift a massive amount of leverage to Democrats, who will provide the bulk of votes to pass any FY2025 spending measures. And they’re going to want something in return.
We told you in Tuesday’s PM edition that there was some discussion of combining all three issues into one mega-deal — debt limit, government funding and disaster aid. That has its obvious downsides as well.
“There are lots of great theories” about how to address this, Thune acknowledged with a laugh on Tuesday. “But it’s always different to have to translate that into practice.”
Trump and GOP leaders must resolve the debt-limit issue in the coming months, probably by early summer, although there’s no “X date” yet. Right now, the preferred option is clearly attaching it to whatever disaster supplemental Congress crafts to respond to the California fires. It could be a $100 billion or more package, although there’s no cost figure available yet. California officials and residents are still dealing with the possibility of more fires.
House and Senate Republicans argue that the huge cost of the California-centric package — which will be treated as emergency funding — necessitates a boost in the debt limit since it wasn’t projected as part of normal government funding needs.
“We also are going to spend a lot of money [to respond to the California fires] and it probably will not be offset, it’s going to necessitate a raise in the debt ceiling. To me, it’s a perfectly appropriate thing,” said House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.). “I think it’s well within the normal bounds of practice. I don’t think we’re asking [Democrats] to do anything unusual.”
“The fact is even if [Democrats] were in charge, they would not be able to increase the amount of FEMA money we need without fixing the debt limit,” added Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), who serves on the Appropriations Committee.
Democrats flatly reject this argument, saying they will oppose any attempt to “condition” disaster aid by attaching other provisions to the measure.
“We should not condition the relief and recovery of American communities devastated by wildfires or other natural disasters on unrelated issues like the debt ceiling,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee.
“Disaster aid must be provided whenever and wherever it is needed. Conversations about the debt ceiling must happen separately,” DeLauro added.