Bill Overview
Title: Debt Ceiling Reform Act
Description: This bill replaces the existing federal debt limit with procedures that allow the Department of the Treasury to continue issuing additional debt unless Congress passes a joint resolution of disapproval regarding the additional debt, and the joint resolution becomes law.
Sponsors: Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: People impacted by changes in U.S. federal debt management policies
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The U.S. federal debt ceiling impacts the government's ability to fund spending that has already been approved by Congress, including social security, defense, and other federal programs.
- If the government cannot issue new debt when necessary, it may have to curtail spending or default on obligations, impacting the entire economy.
- Directly, the bill affects individuals reliant on federal programs such as social security, unemployment benefits, and healthcare provided through programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
- Individually, approximately 67 million Americans receive social security benefits, and many millions more depend on federal assistance through other services.
- Government contractors and employees may also face uncertainty if government funding is constrained due to hitting the debt ceiling.
- The global economic stability is indirectly influenced by the American ability to manage its debt and economic confidence.
Reasoning
- The policy aims to prevent potential economic disruptions caused by hitting the debt ceiling, allowing for more consistent government funding and operations.
- Given its indirect financial impact, a wide range of people could notably benefit, including those on social security and government program beneficiaries.
- Contractors and government employees may have less employment instability due to a smoother fiscal management process.
- The budget limits suggest caution in assessing direct impacts, focusing on broader population sectors with financial reliance on government stability.
- The interviewed individuals should reflect varying socioeconomic realities, reliance on federal programs, age demographics, and occupations to capture a comprehensive view of the policy.
Simulated Interviews
Retired teacher (Florida)
Age: 72 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a retiree, anything that assures the stability of social security payments is crucial for my peace of mind.
- I support any measure that prevents unnecessary political conflict over debt ceilings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Department of Defense contractor (Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Certainty in government funding impacts my job security.
- This reform could reduce the risk of contract disruptions that have affected my work before.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Healthcare worker (California)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Federal funding ensures continued access to Medicaid which is critical for my well-being.
- If this policy avoids Medicaid cuts, I am in favor.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 3 |
Self-employed small business owner (Texas)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone who relies on economic stability, this policy seems beneficial.
- There's less concern about economic shocks that can affect business environments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Social worker (New York)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Stable federal funding means more reliable services for the communities I serve.
- This policy could stabilize funding and help sustain crucial programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
Policy analyst (Washington D.C.)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Removing unnecessary economic brinkmanship from the debt discourse is constructive.
- Policy seems to add stability, which is good for long-term financial planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Factory worker (Idaho)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Economic stability from the government is important for job security in my industry.
- I hope this leads to fewer economic fluctuations overall.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 1 |
Public school teacher (Ohio)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rely on the security of federal funding for my pension.
- Stability in the government budget is essential for future financial planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 2 |
University student (Illinois)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Stable federal government funding is crucial to the continued provision of student aid programs.
- This reform could ensure fiscal backstops for education funding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Retail worker (Michigan)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope for more predictable government-aided healthcare funding.
- This change could reduce sudden shifts in healthcare availability or affordability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 3: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 5: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 100: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill's success in achieving fiscal stability depends on the broader economic conditions and fiscal policies implemented by Congress.
- The potential for market uncertainty if the process for a joint resolution of disapproval is not clearly defined and understood.
- Impacts on global economic confidence given the U.S.'s role as a leading economy and its historically stable debt management.