BS Summary: This article contains 33 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Confirmation Bias, and Overconfidence Bias, with Pessimism Bias as the most egregious example at 20.4% saturation with 166 hits. Analysis detected 1,799 faulty-reasoning hits from 812 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 77.6% and a BS Rank of 85% (3,069 of 20,298 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 84.90% of the article peer group.
Congressional Republicans have begun the process of “reconciliation 3.0,” which, like reconciliation 1.0 (the 2025 tax cuts) and reconciliation 2.0 (new spending on immigrant deportation and border control), will notably expand budget deficits with barely any of the spending cut offsets that Republicans have long promised.
At the end of the day, the voters are the problem.
They want the government to give them everything and not force them to pay for it.
Unfortunately until we have a huge fiscal calamity no one will pay attention.
As always, Reidl is right on target.
Unfortunately, no one will do a damn thing to fix our deficit spending problem.
We are going to have a massive currency meltdown.
I don't know when this will happen or what will be the triggering event.
But it is coming so if you are smart you will protect yourself.
Another excellent piece.
Thank you.
It is interesting that Congress tried to fix deficits with process, then they used the process to create greater deficits.
There is a lesson in that.
Ms.
Reidl,
Thank you for your advocacy of truth and justice.
It's amazing to me the degree to which the filibuster is taken to be natural law of U.S. politics that cannot be repealed, as if it were in the Constitution.
Scrap the filibuster, and budgets will pass without any of this parliamentary legerdemain.
Democrats can raise taxes to match our actual spending levels.
Then we can decide if we actually want to spend that much.
We can also be spared these nightmare omnibus spending bills that pass in the middle of the night that no can read.
Bring down the filibuster, and we're also likely to get more bipartisanship (eventually, anyway) in the passage of bills.
In general Congress will resume its regular functioning instead of ceding power to the other branches.
It's time to cashier this relic of White Supremacy in America.
Sounds like a fantastic idea that would require a Constitutional Amendment that has no chance of happening.
Probably the most depressing thing I've ever read in The Dispatch.
Yikes.
A fellow Dispatcher pointed out to me that Congress adheres to its barebones constitutional requirement regarding budgets.
Yes they do, but even narrowly focused lawyer Congresspeople must admit something is seriously wrong with the current process we’re using.
And the majority of Congress are non-lawyers, many with “some” business background.
They know this ain’t right.
Would they manage their personal finances this way?
I generally agree with Jonah Goldberg that we shouldn't expect our government to be run like a business, EXCEPT in the area of creating and adhering to a budget and budgeting timelines.
These are congressional duties that Americans need to take seriously and be willing to vote out members of congress who don't do their jobs.
What I believe Ms.
Reidl is inferring is that the framework needed to fix this process needs to include consequences for failing to pass the appropriations bills on time (October 1st) as well as reducing spending in a measurable way.
Otherwise, Congress will continue business as normal until the next cataclysmic event occurs (Social Security and Medicare running out of full funding in 2032/2033).
The thing that matters most to members of Congress is the ability to remain in office.
While Congress's approval rating is around 10-11%, around 85-90% of its members get reelected each term.
Just suppose we required that all appropriations bills be passed by October 1st and that the national debt be reduced in a measurable way each term.
And then suppose that, if Congress failed to do so, no member (House or Senate) could run for consecutive reelection.
I'm fairly confident that members would suddenly find a way to work out entitlement reform, improve spending oversight, reduce or eliminate subsidies, tackle waste, fraud and abuse, and do whatever it took (even compromise with the other side!)
to remain in office.
Is there any job other than Congress where you can fail this spectacularly at your most basic duty and not get shown the door?
Because I feel like I’m in the wrong line of work.
Excellent explanation of the process.
It really makes it clear that this could work if our elected officials were not so craven.
Another thoughtful and well researched analysis from Jessica Riedl.
It’s frustrating how few people will take this critical information seriously.
Just like a person that is hopelessly in debt, the first step towards digging out of our unsustainable deficit spending is fixing the budgeting process.
And just like a person that is hopelessly in debt, Congress will resist this because it’s a very uncomfortable and unpopular thing to do.
We’ve all voted for the live in the now and don’t open up the mail strategy, and we’ll likely keep that going until someone shows up to repossess our stuff.
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.