Contrary to the White House’s months-long narrative that Republicans were the ones holding up an increase in the debt ceiling that would prevent a national default, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives passed such a bill over a month ago. They did so amid Biden’s stubborn refusal to negotiate – until he finally negotiated.

On Saturday, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced that he and the White House reached a deal to raise the debt ceiling in time for the purported June 5 deadline, achieving some concessions from Democrats. If approved in today’s anticipated vote, the debt ceiling boost will last until January 2025 – after the next presidential election. 

Crisis averted?

If you look at prospective default – likely a short-term issue – as the primary crisis, sure. But if you understand that the nation’s looming, long-run fiscal crisis remains on the horizon – with the U.S. now nearly $32 trillion in debt – the debt ceiling doesn’t come close.

That’s why Colorado Reps. Ken Buck and Lauren Boebert have announced their intentions to vote no on the forthcoming, so-called Fiscal Responsibility Act – because it isn’t genuinely fiscally responsible.

Their language is stark: Criticizing the deal for “codif(ying) pandemic level discretionary spending instead of returning to a pre-COVID spending number,” Buck visually compared it to a Trojan horse invited by McCarthy and dubbed the deal a “debt ceiling surrender” that will cause the U.S. to “have $35 trillion of debt in January, 2025. That is completely unacceptable.”

Boebert similarly blasted the deal as a “vote for the radical Biden agenda,” suggesting the compromise amounts to “rubber-stamp bankrupting our country.” She declared on Saturday, “You can count me as a NO on this deal. We can do better.” 

Buck’s position was expected. When the House’s original Limit, Save, Grow Act came up for a vote on April 27, Buck unequivocally voting No, asserting it did “not do enough to rein in the federal government’s reckless spending. 

Boebert voted for it, however, tweeting that it was a “responsible action to make sure that we didn’t default on our debt” and chastised Biden for refusing to negotiate. In an accompanying video, Boebert touted several big things their bill would have accomplished. Most of those things aren’t included in the weekend deal – at least, not nearly enough.

Stay up to speed: Sign-up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

Make no mistake: Buck and Boebert deserve credit for emphasizing the nation’s fiscal crisis, given the long-term stakes of such massive debt levels. That’s the kind of fiscal leadership we need – not just now, but down the road. 

However, a reasonable case can be made that McCarthy deserves some credit, too. In a divided government situation, and with an arguably weak hand to play, the speaker forced the president to the table and secured some noteworthy concessions without acquiescing to demands for new taxes.

The deal caps non-defense discretionary spending at $704 billion for fiscal year 2024 – not much higher than House Republicans’ goal of 2022 levels ($689 billion) but still a notably below the projected baseline $757 billion for 2024. 

Republicans are determined to fulfill their pledge of passing 12 appropriations bills by the end of the year – restoring a “regular order” budget procedure that hasn’t happened in years. If Congress fails to do all 12, McCarthy’s agreement includes cuts to all discretionary spending accounts by 1%.

The agreement “claws back” nearly $30 billion in unspent COVID-19 funds – although that’s half of what Republicans wanted originally. It mandates “administrative pay-go” – meaning, if a federal agency’s costs go up, comparable cuts must be identified elsewhere. And the deal advances a longstanding Republican priority to expand work requirements for welfare recipients – in this case, able-bodied, childless adults who receive food stamps.

How about student loans? Biden was never going to cave on his unconstitutional student loan bailout – which the Supreme Court will hopefully strike down next month, anyway – but he’s been kicking the student loan moratorium can down the road well past its expiration date. McCarthy got Biden to agree to terminate the moratorium in the bill, no matter what the Supreme Court decides.

While the original House bill defunded all 87,000 new IRS agents recently approved by Congress, the deal rescinds $1.4 billion in IRS funds, likely preventing any new hiring for this year. It sets up for another $20 billion in IRS funding to be reappropriated elsewhere, such as border security – but it still leaves intact the remaining, whopping $60 billion for the IRS.

Those are some decent achievements, to be sure – things that may justify a Yes vote for most House Republicans amid this tenuous political environment.

But let’s be real: Most of Biden’s concessions were minor when it comes to government reforms, and the spending cuts are tiny (0.2% per year over two years).

Yes, McCarthy kept Biden at the table and secured some worthy wins. But with eyes on the nation’s financial future, Buck and Boebert are within their rights to vote No when the bill comes up in the House today.

Then, the real test for fiscal conservatives in Congress, including Buck and Boebert, will be when the time comes for the appropriations bills – and the next spendthrift Republican president.

Jimmy Sengenberger is an investigative journalist, public speaker, and host of “The Jimmy Sengenberger Show” Saturdays from 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. on News/Talk 710 KNUS. Reach Jimmy online at JimmySengenberger.com or on Twitter @SengCenter.