1) Biden announces a new "emergency budget stability and national security seigniorage fund" at Tsy, and declares that every day between now and June 1 Yellen will deposit another $10bn platinum coin into the fund until R's pass clean ceiling increase
2) Then, on June 1, Biden/Yellen will begin depositing $100bn coins in the fund.
Crucially tho, Biden announces he has no intention of using the fund if the debt ceiling is increased cleanly - if that happens, he will instead recall the coins and shut down the fund
3) If Rs refuse to vote for a clean debt increase, and we hit x-date, then Biden will stop minting more coins, and direct Sec Yellen to use the fund to cover daily spending until the previously accumulated balance is run down completely to zero or R's vote for a clean increase
4) If the Rs continue to refuse to pass a clean increase, and the emergency fund is depleted, Biden will then crease a new fund, called the Permanent Fiscal Financing Fund, and mint a $X trillion coin sufficient to cover annual budget costs (and then some).
One of the most frustrating things about the debt ceiling/mainstream #MintTheCoin discourse is the complete erasure of non-tax, non-debt-issuance mechanisms for refilling the TGA that exist and occur *today*.
The Mint returns hundreds of millions in seigniorage annually. The Fed returns tens of billions.
These are not "taxes or borrowing" yet the media acts as if the platinum coin would be the first time any revenue has ever entered the TGA outside of bond sales/taxes
To take just one example in a sea of examples, this article by @imillhiser from 'explainer' Vox actively miseducates people as to how the government budget works.
[Very Serious Dems, in Charlie Kelly Voice]: "can we talk to you about the debt ceiling? We've been dying to talk to you about the debt ceiling all day."
"So we have 3 ways of dealing with the ceiling.
The first is the plain meaning of legislation. We just basically ignore that. We figure, if Congress thought it was important for us to use existing law to avoid default, they'd have given us the legal authority to do so."
"The second is extraordinary measures. We just take existing funds, and move them around in our accounts, and that buys us a few more months of debt issuance."
There are still options that Biden hasn't used (Ie the platinum coin) which means the ostensible tension between the debt ceiling and spending commitments doesn't actually exist yet.
I'd also have just issued the bonds and waited for others to sue rather than preemptively suing. Permission vs forgiveness, and all that.
But important to note: if the Court rejects this arg, then the coin remains a viable alternative since it's a legal way to finance spending.
At a more fundamental level, the entire premise of this argument is that the executive branch can only either tax or borrow to raise funds - but this is empirically and conceptually false. The executive branch also *creates* money, its the most fundamental power. Missing 4th leg.
1) Acknowledging from the outset that while a public digital dollar and CBDC are often conflated, the former could also be issued by the Treasury Department
2) Pointing out that all the major forms of privately intermediated digital payments - that the Fed is using as the baseline/status quo from which a CBDC is ostensibly building on top of - have huge privacy & censorship & inclusion/access issues relative to publicly issued cash
I respect @jeannasmialek's reporting but this is just incorrect.
"Failure to raise the statutory cap on the nation’s borrowing power...would lead to a first-ever default, creating financial chaos in the United States and the global economy"
It's possible that a default would occur in that situation, but it would be b/c Tsy Secretary Yellen refused to use other options available at that moment to prevent default. Whether she has the legal authority to refuse in that moment is...questionable