incongruity 1

James Hamilton makes a very concise point about the potentially problematic way congressional voting is conducted on deficits and debt; simply put, the voting on debt and deficit are tabulated at separate occasions. This hints (in-a-probably-not-at-all-hushed-whisper) at time inconsistency and myopic practice; the set-up leaves politicians alot of room for contradiction in campaign promises and action. the paradox promise of " No tax increases!! but Debt must decrease!!!" is a case in point.

Hamilton puts it better than I do and i quote from his post:

One of the peculiar embarrassments of the American political process is the fact that Congress votes separately on the deficit and debt, as if they were two different decisions. This bizarre arrangement allows Congress the luxury of instructing the Treasury to spend more than it takes in as revenue while at the same time voting to deny the authority to borrow the funds that would be necessary to implement the plan.

If the government is (a) required by the deficit legislation to spend, and (b) precluded by the debt legislation from borrowing, the Treasury would be forced into default.

its an interesting start to 2011 with the Republicans officially taking over the House. What should rational expectations suggest to us in this case?