The Debt Limit: History and Recent Increases

^Pr^ep^ar^{ed f}^o^r^M^e^m^b^ers^an^d^Com^mⁱ^t^t^ees^of^C^ong^r^e^ss

Total debt of the federal government can increase in two ways. First, debt increases when the
government sells debt to the public to finance budget deficits and acquire the financial resources
needed to meet its obligations. This increases debt held by the public. Second, debt increases
when the federal government issues debt to certain government accounts, such as the Social
Security, Medicare, and Transportation trust funds, in exchange for their reported surpluses. This
increases debt held by government accounts. The sum of debt held by the public and debt held by
government accounts is the total federal debt. Surpluses generally reduce debt held by the public,
while deficits raise it.
A statutory limit has restricted total federal debt since 1917 when Congress passed the Second
Liberty Bond Act. Congress has raised the debt limit five times since 2001. Deficits each year
since 2001 and the persistent increases in debt held by government accounts repeatedly raised the
debt to or near the limit in place at the time. Congress raised the limit in June 2002, and by
December 2002 the U.S. Department of the Treasury asked Congress for another increase, which
was passed in May 2003. In June 2004, the Treasury asked for another debt limit increase. After
Congress recessed in mid-October 2004 without acting, the Secretary of the Treasury told
Congress that the actions he was taking to avoid exceeding the debt limit would suffice only
through mid-November. Congress approved a debt limit increase in a post-election session, which
the President signed on November 19, 2004.
In 2005, Congress included debt limit raising reconciliation instructions in the FY2006 budget
resolution (H.Con.Res. 95). Approval of the budget resolution in April 2005 triggered the
automatic passage of a debt limit increase in the House. With no action having been taken by
December 2005, the Secretary of the Treasury sent several letters warning Congress that the
Treasury would exhaust its options to avoid default by mid-March 2006. Congress passed an
increase in mid-March, which the President signed on March 20.
The House’s adoption of the conference report on the FY2008 budget resolution in the spring of
2007 automatically created and deemed passed legislation (H.J.Res. 43) raising the debt limit by
$850 billion to $9,815 billion. The Senate approved the resolution on September 27, 2007, and it
was signed by the President two days later. The 2008 economic slowdown has led to sharply
higher estimates of the FY2008 deficit, raising the prospect of another debt limit increase. The
budget resolution conference report (S.Con.Res. 70), passed by the Senate on June 4, 2008, and
the House the next day, recommends spending levels that would require an increased debt limit in
FY2009. House passage of the FY2009 budget resolution automatically created and deemed
passed legislation to raise the debt limit (H.J.Res. 92). A debt limit increase was included in the
Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (H.R. 3221) and signed into law (P.L. 110-289) on
July 30. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (H.R. 1424), signed into law on
October 3 (P.L. 110-343), raised the debt limit for the second time in 2008. The debt limit now
stands at $11,315 billion. This report will be updated as events warrant.

Introduc tion ..................................................................................................................................... 1
The Debt Limit and the Treasury..............................................................................................1
Why Have a Debt Limit?..........................................................................................................1
A Brief History of the Federal Debt Limit......................................................................................2
Origins of the Federal Debt Limit.............................................................................................2
World War II and After..............................................................................................................3
The Debt Ceiling in the Last Decade..............................................................................................3
The Debt Limit Issue in 2002....................................................................................................4
Resolving the Debt Limit Issue in 2002..............................................................................6
The Debt Limit Issue in 2003....................................................................................................7
The Debt Limit Issue in 2004....................................................................................................8
The Debt Limit Issue in 2005, 2006, and 2007.........................................................................9
The 2008 Economic Slowdown and Federal Debt..................................................................10
Fiscal Policy Considerations.............................................................................................10
Raising the Debt Ceiling in 2008.......................................................................................11
Revised Deficit Estimates in 2008....................................................................................12
Concluding Comments..................................................................................................................13
Further Reading.............................................................................................................................15
Figure 1. Components of Federal Debt As Percentage of GDP, FY1980-FY2007........................6
Table 1. Components of Debt Subject to Limit, FY1996-FY2007..................................................5
Table A-1.Components of Debt Subject to Limit by Month, September 2001-August
2008 ............................................................................................................................................ 16
Appendix. Debt Subject to Limit by Month Since September 2001.............................................16
Author Contact Information..........................................................................................................19

The statutory debt limit applies to almost all federal debt.¹ The limit applies to federal debt held
by the public (that is, debt held outside the federal government itself) and to federal debt held by
the government’s own accounts. Federal trust funds, such as Social Security, Medicare, ²
Transportation, and Civil Service Retirement accounts, hold most of this internally held debt.
The government’s surpluses or deficits determine essentially all of the change in debt held by the ³
public. The government’s on-budget fiscal balance, which excludes a small U.S. Postal Service
net surplus or deficit and a large Social Security surplus of payroll taxes net of paid benefits, does ⁴
not directly affect debt held in government accounts. Increases or decreases in debt held by
government accounts result from net financial flows into accounts holding the debt, such as the
Social Security Trust Fund. Legal requirements and government accounting practices also affect ⁵
levels of debt held by government accounts.
Standard methods of financing federal activities or meeting government obligations used by the
U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) can be hobbled when federal debt nears its legal limit. If
the limit prevents the Treasury from issuing new debt to manage short-term cash flows or to
finance an annual deficit, the government may be unable to obtain the cash needed to pay its bills
or it may be unable to invest the surpluses of designated government accounts (federal trust
funds) in federal debt as generally required by law. In either case, the Treasury is left in a bind;
the law requires that the government’s legal obligations be paid, but the debt limit may prevent it
from issuing the debt that would allow it to do so.
The government’s income and outlays vary over the course of the year, producing monthly
surpluses and deficits that affect the level of debt, whether or not the government has a surplus or
deficit for the entire year. The government accounts holding federal debt also can experience
monthly deficits and surpluses, even if most of them currently show annual surpluses.
The debt limit, as noted above, can hinder the Treasury’s ability to manage the federal
government’s finances. In extreme cases, when the federal debt is very near its statutory limit, the

¹^A^{bout 0}^.^8%^of^to^ta^{l de}^b^t^is^e^x^c^l^u^d^e^d^f^r^om^de^{bt lim}^{it c}^o^v^e^r^a^ge^{. A}^s^of^A^p^r^{il 200}^{8, t}^o^ta^l^pu^blic^de^{bt o}^u^ts^ta^ndi^ng^w^a^s
^$9.³⁶^{8 tr}^il^lio^n;^de^{bt s}^ubje^c^t^t^o^li^m^it^w^a^s^$9.28^{9 tr}^ill^io^{n or}⁹⁹^.2%^of^tota^{l p}^ubl^ic^de^bt^o^u^ts^ta^nd^ing^.^T^h^e^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^defⁱ^ne^s
^“T^o^t^al^P^u^b^lⁱ^c^Deb^t^S^u^b^j^ect^t^o^Lⁱ^mⁱ^t^”^a^s^“t^h^e^Tota^{l P}^ublic^De^b^t^O^u^tsta^ndi^ng^le^{ss the}^Uⁿ^am^or^tiz^e^d^Dⁱ^s^c^{ount on}
^Tre^a^sury^Bills^an^{d Ze}^ro-C^ou^poⁿ^Tre^a^sury^Bo^nds^,^ol^{d de}^b^t^is^s^u^e^d^b^e^f^o^r^e^1917,^aⁿ^d^ol^{d c}^u^r^r^e^nc^y^ca^lle^{d U}ⁿ^ite^d^Sta^t^e^s
^N^o^te^s^,^a^s^w^e^{ll a}^s^D^e^{bt he}^{ld by}^the^Fe^de^r^a^{l Fi}^na^nc^ing^B^a^nk^aⁿ^d^G^u^a^r^aⁿ^te^e^d^D^e^bt.”
²^A^lthoug^{h t}^h^e^r^e^a^r^e^hu^ndr^e^d^s^of^tr^us^{t f}^unds^,^the^ov^e^r^w^h^e^l^mⁱ^ng^m^a^jo^r^ity^a^r^e^v^e^r^y^sm^a^{ll. T}^h^e^{12 la}^r^g^e^s^{t tr}^us^{t f}^uⁿ^d^s^h^o^ld
^98.^8%^of^the^f^e^de^r^a^{l de}^bt^he^{ld i}ⁿ^g^o^v^e^rⁿ^m^e^{nt a}^c^c^ounts^.
³^O^t^he^r^m^e^aⁿ^s^of^fⁱ^na^nc^ing^—^inc^l^u^d^ing^c^a^s^{h ba}^la^nc^e^c^h^aⁿ^g^e^s^,^s^e^ig^nior^a^g^e^,^a^{nd c}^a^p^ita^liz^a^tioⁿ^of^fⁱ^na^ncing^a^c^c^ounts^us^e^d
^{to f}^und^f^e^de^ra^{l c}^r^e^d^{it prog}^ra^m^s^—^h^a^v^e^re^la^tiv^e^l^y^little^e^f^f^e^c^t^{on the}^c^h^aⁿ^g^e^{s in de}^bt^he^l^d^by^the^p^ubli^c^.
⁴^Iⁿ^f^u^tur^e^y^e^a^r^s^,^w^h^eⁿ^s^o^m^e^tr^us^{t f}^unds^a^r^e^pr^oje^c^t^e^d^to^pa^y^{out m}^o^r^e^thaⁿ^t^h^e^y^ta^ke^{in, f}^unds^t^h^a^t^t^h^e^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^w^ould
^us^e^{to r}^e^de^e^m^thos^e^inte^r^g^ov^e^r^nm^eⁿ^ta^{l de}^bts^m^u^s^t^be^obtaⁱ^ne^{d v}ⁱ^a^hⁱ^g^h^e^r^ta^x^e^s^or^low^e^r^g^o^v^e^rⁿ^m^e^{nt spe}^ndi^ng^.
⁵^T^r^us^{t f}^{und s}^u^r^p^lus^e^s^by^la^w^m^u^s^t^be^inv^e^s^t^e^dⁱⁿ^s^p^e^cⁱ^a^l^f^e^de^ra^{l g}^ove^rnm^e^{nt s}^e^c^u^ritie^s^.

Treasury must take unusual and extraordinary measures to meet federal obligations.⁶ While the
debt limit has never caused the federal government to default on its obligations, it has at times
caused great inconvenience and has added uncertainty to Treasury operations.
The debt limit also provides Congress with the strings to control the federal purse, allowing ⁷
Congress to assert its constitutional prerogatives to control spending. The debt limit also imposes
a form of fiscal accountability, which compels Congress and the President to take visible action to
allow further federal borrowing when the federal government spends more than it collects in
revenues. In the words of one author, the debt limit “expresses a national devotion to the idea of ⁸
thrift and to economical management of the fiscal affairs of the government.”

The statutory limit on federal debt began with the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917,⁹ which ¹⁰
helped finance the United States’ entry into World War I. By allowing the Treasury to issue
long-term Liberty Bonds, which were marketed to the public at large, the federal government held ¹¹
down its interest costs.
Before World War I, Congress authorized specific loans, such as the Panama Canal loan, or
allowed the Treasury to issue specific types of debt instruments, such as certificates of ¹²
indebtedness, bills, notes and bonds. In other cases, Congress provided the Treasury with ¹³
limited discretion to choose debt instruments.
With the passage of the Second Liberty Bond Act, Congress enacted aggregate constraints on
certificates of indebtedness and on bonds that allowed the Treasury greater ability to respond to
changing conditions and more flexibility in financial management. Debt limit legislation in the
following two decades also set separate limits for different categories of debt, such as bills,
certificates, and bonds.

⁶^U^.^{S. G}^e^ne^r^a^{l A}^c^c^ountiⁿ^g^O^f^fⁱ^c^e⁽^G^A^O⁾^,^Analy^s^is^{of Ac}^ti^ons^Tak^eⁿ^d^u^rⁱⁿ^g^t^h^e²⁰⁰³^D^e^{bt I}^s^s^u^anc^e^Sus^pe^ns^ion^Pe^rⁱ^o^d^,
^GAO-04-5^26,^Ma^y²⁰⁰⁴^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http^://w^ww^.^g^a^o^.g^ov^/ⁿ^e^w^.ite^m^s^/d04⁵²^6.^pdf^.
⁷^{For a}^vⁱ^g^o^ro^{us a}^sse^rtion^of^the^u^t^ility^of^the^de^{bt c}^e^iling^,^se^e^Aⁿ^ita^{S. Drish}ⁿ^a^k^um^a^r^{, “}^I^{n De}^f^e^nse^of^the^De^{bt L}ⁱ^m^it
^S^t^at^u^t^e,^”^H^a^r^v^ar^{d J}^our^nal^oⁿ^Le^gⁱ^s^l^atioⁿ^{, v}^o^l^.^42,²⁰⁰⁵^,^pp.¹^35-¹⁸^5.
⁸^Ma^r^s^ha^{ll A}^.^R^obi^ns^oⁿ^,^T^h^e^N^a^tio^{nal D}^e^b^t^C^e^ili^ng:^Aⁿ^Ex^pe^rⁱ^m^e^nt^{in Fis}^c^al^Po^lic^y^{, W}^a^s^h^ing^t^on,^D^C^{: T}^h^e^B^r^ook^ing^s
^Institutⁱ^oⁿ^{, 19}^59,^p^p^.5^.
⁹^P^.^L^.^65-⁴³^{, 4}⁰^S^t^a^t^.²⁸^{8, e}ⁿ^a^c^t^e^d^Se^pte^m^be^r^{24, 1}⁹¹⁷^{. C}^u^r^r^e^nt^ly^c^o^difⁱ^e^d^a^s^am^e^nde^{d a}^s³¹^U^.^S.C^.^§³¹⁰^1.
¹⁰^H^.^J^.^C^o^ok^e^a^nd^{M. K}^a^tz^eⁿ^{, “}^T^he^P^u^blic^D^e^{bt L}ⁱ^m^it,”^J^our^nal^of^Fⁱ^na^nc^e^{, v}^o^l.^9,^no.^{3 (}^S^e^p^te^m^b^e^r¹⁹⁵⁴⁾^,^pp.²⁹^8-
³⁰³^.
¹¹^Ro^b^e^{rt D.}^Ho^rm^ats,^T^h^{e P}^rⁱ^{ce o}^f^Lⁱ^b^e^rt^y,⁽^N^e^w^Y^o^r^k^{: H}^e^nr^y^H^o^lt,²⁰⁰⁷⁾^,^c^h^.^4.
¹²^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^c^e^rtif^ic^a^t^e^s^of^inde^bte^d^ne^{ss w}^e^r^e^short-te^rm^{, inte}^re^st-be^a^r^ing^se^c^u^ritie^{s. T}^r^e^a^s^ur^y^{bills a}^r^e^se^c^u^ritie^{s w}^{ith a}
^m^a^turity^of^a^y^e^a^r^{or le}^{ss. T}^r^e^a^sury^note^s^a^r^e^inte^re^st-be^a^r^ing^se^c^u^ritie^{s tha}^t^g^e^ne^ra^lly^ha^ve^m^a^turitie^{s of}^tw^{o to f}ⁱ^v^e
^y^e^a^r^s^.^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^bonds^a^r^e^inte^re^s^t^-be^a^r^ing^s^e^c^u^ritie^s^tha^t^g^e^ne^ra^lly^ha^v^e^m^a^turitie^s^of^{10 or}^m^o^re^y^e^ars^.
¹³^Ma^r^s^ha^{ll A}^.^R^obi^ns^oⁿ^,^T^h^e^N^a^tio^{nal D}^e^b^t^C^e^ili^ng:^Aⁿ^Ex^pe^rⁱ^m^e^nt^{in Fis}^c^al^Po^lic^y^{, (}^W^a^s^hing^ton,^D^C^{: T}^h^e
^B^r^o^o^kⁱⁿ^{gs I}ⁿ^st^it^u^t^io^n,¹⁹⁵⁹⁾^,^p^p^.¹^-⁶^.

In 1939, Congress eliminated separate limits on bonds and on other types of debt, which created ¹⁴
the first aggregate limit that covered nearly all public debt. This measure gave the Treasury freer
rein to manage the federal debt as it saw fit. In particular, the Treasury could choose to issue debt
instruments with maturities that would reduce interest costs and minimize financial risks ¹⁵
stemming from future interest rate changes given the conditions in financial markets. On the
other hand, although the Treasury was delegated greater independence of action, the debt limit on
the eve of World War II was much closer to total federal debt than it had been at the end of World
War I. For example, the 1919 Victory Liberty Bond Act (P.L. 65-328) raised the maximum
allowable federal debt to $43 billion, far above the $25.5 billion in total federal debt at the end of ¹⁶
FY1919. By contrast, the debt limit in 1939 was $45 billion, only about 10% above the $40.4
billion total federal debt of that time.
The debt ceiling was raised to accommodate accumulating costs for World War II in each year ¹⁷
from 1941 through 1945, when it was set at $300 billion. After World War II ended, the debt
limit was reduced to $275 billion. Because the Korean War was mostly financed by higher taxes
rather than by increased debt, the limit remained at $275 billion until 1954. After 1954, the debt
limit was reduced twice and increased seven times, until March 1962 when it again reached $300
billion, its level at the end of World War II. Since March 1962, Congress has enacted 69 separate ¹⁸
measures that have altered the limit on federal debt. Most of these changes in the debt limit
were, measured in percentage terms, small in comparison to changes adopted in wartime or
during the Great Depression. Some recent increases in the debt limit, however, were large in
dollar terms. For instance, in May 2003, the debt limit increased by $984 billion.

During the four years (FY1998-FY2001) the government ran surpluses, federal debt held by
intergovernmental accounts grew by $855 billion and debt held by the public fell by almost $450
billion. Since FY2001, however, debt held by the public grew continually due to persistent and
substantial budget deficits, as shown in Table 1, which shows components of debt in current ¹⁹
dollars and as percentages of gross domestic product (GDP). Debt held in government accounts
also continued to grow.

¹⁴^P^.^L^.^76-²⁰^1.^Som^e^a^u^thor^s^c^l^aⁱ^m^e^{d the}^a^g^g^r^e^g^a^t^e^li^m^it^w^a^s^fⁱ^r^s^{t c}^r^e^a^t^e^dⁱⁿ^Publ^ic^D^e^{bt A}^c^{t of}¹⁹⁴¹⁽^P^.L^{. 77-}⁷⁾^{. T}^h^e
¹⁹³⁹^Se^na^te^f^l^oor^de^ba^te^{, h}^o^w^e^v^e^r^,^m^a^k^e^s^c^l^ea^r^tha^t^C^ong^r^e^s^s^inteⁿ^d^e^d^t^o^lif^{t c}^a^t^e^g^or^ic^a^l^de^{bt r}^e^s^t^rⁱ^c^t^ions^.^Se^e^Se^na^te
^de^ba^te^,^C^o^ngr^e^s^sⁱ^o^{nal Re}^c^o^r^d^{, v}^o^l^{. 8}⁴^,^pa^r^t⁶⁽^J^une^1,¹⁹³⁹⁾^{, p}^p^.⁶⁴^80,⁶⁴⁹⁷^-⁶⁵⁰¹^.
¹⁵^T^h^{is lim}^{it did}^not^a^pply^{to c}^e^r^ta^{in pre}^v^io^{us p}^ublic^de^bt^issue^s^tha^t^c^onstitu^te^{d a}^mⁱ^nor^porti^on^of^the^f^e^de^ra^{l de}^bt.
¹⁶^U^.^{S. B}^u^r^e^a^u^of^the^C^e^ns^us^,^Histo^r^ic^{al St}^atistic^{s o}^f^t^h^e^Unite^d^St^ate^s^{: Colo}^nia^l^Time^{s to}¹⁹⁷⁰^{, H}^.^D^o^c^.^93-⁷⁸
⁽^W^a^s^hing^{ton: G}^P^O^,¹⁹⁷⁵⁾^{, Se}^rⁱ^e^s^Y⁴⁹^3-⁵⁰⁴^.
¹⁷^P^u^blic^D^e^{bt A}^c^ts^of¹⁹⁴^{1 (}^P^.L^{. 7}⁷^-⁷⁾^,¹⁹⁴²⁽^P^.L^.^77-⁵¹⁰⁾^,¹⁹^{43 (}⁷^8-³⁴⁾^,¹⁹^{44 (}^P^.L^{. 7}⁸^-³³³⁾^,^a^nd¹⁹^{45 (}^P^.L^{. 79-}⁴⁸⁾^.
¹⁸^U^.^{S. O}^f^fⁱ^c^e^o^f^Ma^na^g^e^m^e^{nt a}^nd^B^udg^e^t^,^FY²⁰⁰⁸^Bu^dge^t^{of t}^h^e^U^.^{S. G}^o^v^e^r^nm^eⁿ^t:^Hⁱ^s^t^or^ic^al^Ta^ble^s^{, T}^a^ble^7-^3.
¹⁹^Uⁿ^til²⁰⁰¹^{, g}^o^v^e^rnm^e^{nt publ}^ic^a^tions^did^no^{t d}ⁱ^vⁱ^de^de^bt^s^u^bje^c^t^to^lim^{it into t}^h^e^p^o^rti^ons^he^ld^by^the^pub^lic^aⁿ^d^he^l^d
^by^g^ove^rⁿ^m^e^{nt a}^c^c^ounts^.^T^h^is^dis^c^us^sⁱ^{on a}ⁿ^d^Ta^b^l^{e 1}^u^s^{e CRS}^cal^cu^l^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^t^h^at^app^r^o^xⁱ^m^at^{e t}^h^{e amo}^uⁿ^t^s^o^f^d^e^b^t
^subje^c^t^to^lim^{it he}^ld^{in t}^h^e^s^e^tw^{o c}^a^t^e^g^orie^s^f^o^{r f}ⁱ^sc^a^l^y^e^a^r^{s prior to}²⁰^01.

Figure 1 shows the components of federal debt as shares of gross domestic product (GDP) from ²⁰
FY1980 through FY2007. Federal debt held by government accounts has grown steadily since
1980. Debt held by the public, which changes in response to total surpluses or deficits, grew as a
share of GDP through the mid-1990s. After FY1992, deficits shrank, and from FY1998 through ²¹
FY2001 the federal government ran surpluses. Those surpluses, along with rapid GDP growth,
reduced debt held by the public as a percentage of GDP. When large deficits returned and GDP
growth slowed in the early 2000s, debt held by the public as a share of GDP again increased.
Smaller deficits in FY2006 and FY2007 led to smaller increases in publicly held debt. The total ²²
FY2007 deficit fell to 1.2% of GDP according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). As
the economy started to slow in the last quarter of (calendar) 2007, most forecasters predicted a
sharp increase in the federal deficit for FY2008, which put federal debt on track to exceed the
debt limit before the end of FY2009.
Accumulating debt in government accounts produced most of the pressure on the debt limit that
occurred early in 2002. As deficits reemerged in FY2002, increases in debt held by the public
added to the pressure on the debt limit in the spring of 2002. During the four fiscal years with
surpluses (FY1998-FY2001), the increases in federally held debt and decreases in debt held by
the public produced a net increase of $405 billion in total debt subject to limit. At the beginning
of FY2002 (October 1, 2001), debt subject to limit was within $217 billion of the existing $5.95 ²³
trillion debt limit. Between then and the end of May 2002, debt subject to limit increased by
another $217 billion, divided between a $117 billion increase in debt held by government
accounts and a $100 billion increase in debt held by the public, putting the debt close to the $5.95
trillion limit. Table A-1, presented in the Appendix, shows month-by-month debt totals and
accumulations from September 2001 through May 2008.
In the fall of 2001, the Administration recognized that a deteriorating budget outlook and
continued growth in debt held by government accounts were likely to lead to the debt limit soon
being reached. In early December 2001, it asked Congress to raise the debt limit by $750 billion
to $6.7 trillion. As the debt moved closer to and reached the debt limit over the first six months of
FY2002, the Administration asked Congress repeatedly to increase the debt limit, warning of
adverse financial consequences were the limit not raised.
On April 4, 2002, the Treasury held debt below the limit by invoking its legislatively mandated
authority to suspend reinvestment of government securities in the G-Fund of the federal
employees’ Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). This allowed the Treasury to issue new debt and meet the
government’s obligations. On April 15, debt subject to limit stood at $5,949,975 million, just $25

²⁰^T^h^e^da^ta^s^how^c^o^m^pone^nts^of^de^{bt c}^o^m^p^a^r^e^d^to^the^sⁱ^z^e^of^the^e^c^o^nom^y^.^T^h^is^a^v^oids^pos^sⁱ^ble^dis^t^o^r^tions^re^s^u^lting
^f^r^o^m^ch^an^giⁿ^g^p^rⁱ^{ce l}^e^vel^s^o^v^{er t}ⁱ^m^{e an}^dⁱⁿ^cl^u^d^e^{s ch}^an^{ges i}ⁿ^p^e^{r c}^a^pⁱ^t^aⁱⁿ^co^m^e^s.^T^hⁱ^s^p^e^rcen^t^a^{ge i}ⁿ^crease^s^w^h^en^d^e^b^t
^g^r^ow^s^f^a^ste^r^thaⁿ^G^D^P^aⁿ^{d f}^a^{lls w}^h^eⁿ^{it g}^r^ow^s^m^o^re^slow^l^y^thaⁿ^G^D^P^.
²¹^F^e^d^e^ral^oⁿ^-^b^u^d^g^et^recei^p^t^{s an}^d^o^u^t^l^a^{ys n}^earl^y^m^a^t^c^h^e^dⁱⁿ^F^Y¹⁹⁹⁹^,^an^d^t^h^{e on}^-bu^d^g^et^su^r^p^l^u^{s i}ⁿ^F^Y²⁰⁰⁰^w^a^{s 0}^.⁹^%^o^f
^G^D^P^.^P^rⁱ^o^r^t^o^F^Y¹⁹⁹⁹^,^th^{e f}^e^d^e^r^a^l^go^verⁿ^men^t^l^a^st^h^a^d^aⁿ^oⁿ^-b^udg^e^t^surpl^u^{s in}^FY1⁹⁶⁰^{. S}^o^cⁱ^a^l^Se^c^u^rity^re^c^e^{ipts in}
^e^x^c^e^s^s^of^be^ne^f^its^c^o^m^p^rⁱ^s^e^m^o^s^t^of^the^of^f^-^budg^e^t^s^u^r^p^l^u^s^,^w^h^ic^{h h}^a^s^be^eⁿ^posⁱ^tiv^e^sⁱ^nc^e^FY¹⁹⁸⁵^.
²²^U.^S^.^C^oⁿ^g^ress,^Coⁿ^g^ressi^oⁿ^a^l^Bud^g^et^Offⁱ^ce,^Aⁿ^Aⁿ^al^y^sⁱ^s^o^f^t^h^{e P}^r^esi^d^en^t^’^{s Bud}^g^et^ar^y^P^r^op^o^s^al^{s f}^o^{r F}ⁱ^scal^Year
²⁰⁰^9,^Ma^rc^{h 2}⁰⁰⁸^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^ht^tp://w^w^w^.c^bo.g^o^v^/^f^t^pdoc^s^/^89x^x^/^doc⁸⁹^90/^03-^19-Aⁿ^a^l^P^r^e^s^Budg^e^t^.p^df^.
²³^T^h^e^de^{bt lim}^{it w}^a^{s ra}^ise^d^f^r^om^$⁵^.5^trilli^on^to^$5^.9^{5 tril}^lioⁿ^{on A}^u^g^u^{st 5,}¹⁹^97,^a^s^pa^rt^of^the^Ba^la^nc^e^d^Budg^e^t^A^c^{t of}
¹⁹⁹⁷⁽^P^.L^.¹⁰^5-³³^{, 11}^{1 Sta}^t^{. 25}¹⁾^.

million below the limit. Once April 15 tax revenues flowed in, the Treasury “made whole” the G-
Fund by restoring all of the debt that had not been issued to the TSP over this period and crediting ²⁴
the fund with interest it would have earned on that debt. By the end of April, debt subject to
limit had fallen back $35 billion below the limit.
Table 1. Components of Debt Subject to Limit, FY1996-FY2007
^{(in billions of current doll}^ars^a^{nd as percenta}^g^{e of G}^D^P)
^{Debt subject to limi}^t
^{Held by government}
^Total^acc^ounts^{Held by the public}^{End of}
^fiscal^Debt
^year^limit^{$ billion}^{% of GDP}^{$ billion}^{% of GDP}^{$ billion}^{% of GDP}
¹⁹⁹⁶^$5,50⁰^$5,13^7.2^65.7%^1,43^2.4^18.3%^3,70^4.8^47.4%
¹⁹⁹⁷^5,95⁰^5,32^7.6^64.2%^1,58^1.9^19.0%^3,74^5.8^45.1%
¹⁹⁹⁸^5,95⁰^5,43^9.4^62.2%^1,74^2.1^19.9%^3,69^7.4^42.3%
¹⁹⁹⁹^5,95⁰^5,56^7.7^60.1%^1,95^8.2^21.1%^3,60^9.5^38.9%
²⁰⁰⁰^5,95⁰^5,59^1.6^57.0%^2,20^3.9^22.4%^3,38^7.7^34.5%
²⁰⁰¹^5,95⁰^5,73^2.8^56.6%^2,43^6.5^24.1%^3,29^6.3^32.5%
²⁰⁰²^6,40⁰^6,16^1.4^58.9%^2,64^4.2^25.3%^3,51^7.2^33.6%
²⁰⁰³^7,38⁴^6,73^7.6^61.4%^2,84^6.7^25.9%^3,89^0.8^35.5%
²⁰⁰⁴^7,38⁴^7,33^3.4^62.5%^3,05^6.6^26.0%^4,27^6.8^36.4%
²⁰⁰⁵^8,18⁴^7,87^1.0^64.0%^3,30^1.0^26.9%^4,57^0.1^37.2%
²⁰⁰⁶^8,96⁵^8,42^0.3^64.2%^3,61^0.4^27.5%^4,80^9.8^36.7%
²⁰⁰⁷^9,81⁵^a^9,00^7.7^65.2%^3,95^8.4^28.6%^5,04^9.3^36.5%
^{Change Du}^ring^$40^{5.2 $85}^4.6^$–4^49.5
^FY199^{8 - FY20}⁰¹
^{Change Du}^ring^$5,32^{7.6 $1,58}^1.9^$3,74^5.8
^FY200^{2 - FY20}⁰⁷
^Source:^{U.S. Department of t}^he^{Treasury, Financial Ma}^nagement^Service,^{Treasury Bulletin}^{, June}²⁰^{01 a}^nd
^December²⁰^{06. Bu}^{reau of t}^{he P}^{ublic Debt,}^{Monthly Statement of P}^{ublic Debt}^{, August 20}^{07. CRS calculations.}
^{Totals may not sum due to}^roun^ding.
^Note:^{For the fiscal years 19}⁹⁶^t^hrough²⁰⁰^{0, the amou}^nts^{held b}^y^governme^{nt accou}^{nts a}^{nd held}^{by the}^p^ublic
^{are ap}^{proximations. In}²⁰^{01, the}^Treasury^pu^{blications began distinguishing}^{holders of debt s}^ubject^{to limit}^{. The}
^num^{bers in}^{the ta}^{ble showing t}^{his breakdown}^{for FY19}^{96 t}^hroug^h^FY200^{0 were}^{calculated by s}^ubt^r^{acting debts}
^{of the Federal Financing Ban}^{k, an}^{arm of the Trea}^sur^{y whose de}^bt^{is not subject to limit, from total}^{debt held by}
^government^account^{s. This calculation approximates t}^{he amou}^{nt o}^f^{that debt}^su^{bject to limit. This a}^pproximation
^{overestimates debt b}^y^{billions of dol}^{lars because}^{estimates of}^una^{mortized discount are unavailable}^{. This adjusted}
^{amount was t}^hen^su^{btracted f}^{rom total debt subject to limit to produce an a}^ppro^{ximate measu}^re^{of debt held by}
^{the p}^{ublic su}^{bject to limit. Because the amou}^{nt h}^{eld by govern}^men^{t accounts is overe}^{stimated, the r}^esulting

²⁴^Fo^{r a s}^h^o^r^t^dⁱ^scu^ssioⁿ^o^f^th^{e T}^r^ea^su^ry^{’s p}^r^ev^io^u^s^u^s^{es o}^f^{its sh}^o^r^t-t^e^r^m^ab^ility^to^av^oⁱ^d^b^r^eachⁱⁿ^g^th^e^d^e^b^t^lim^{it, see}
^archⁱ^v^ed^CRS^Rep^o^r^t⁹⁸^-80⁵^,^Pu^blic^D^e^bt^Lim^{it Le}^gis^l^at^io^n:^{A Br}ⁱ^e^{f H}ⁱ^s^t^or^y^an^{d C}^ontr^o^v^e^r^sⁱ^e^s^{in th}^e¹⁹⁸^0s^and
¹⁹⁹^0s^,^by^P^hⁱ^lip^Wⁱ^nte^r^s^;^f^o^r^a^c^o^m^p^r^e^he^ns^iv^e^r^e^por^{t s}^e^e^U^.^{S. G}^e^ne^r^a^{l A}^c^c^ounting^O^f^fⁱ^c^e^,^D^e^{bt C}^e^iling:^An^aly^s^is^of
^Ac^tions^D^u^rⁱⁿ^g^the¹⁹^95-¹⁹⁹⁶^C^r^is^is^{, G}^A^O^/^A^I^MD^-^96-¹³^{0, A}^u^g^u^s^t¹⁹^96.

^{measure of de}^{bt h}^{eld by the}^p^{ublic subject to limit is underestimat}^{ed. Nevertheless, the}^{se ap}^proxi^mations
^{reported in t}^{he table a}^{bove suf}^{fice to show how the}^{two categories have c}^{hanged over}^{the time.}
^a.^{Debt limit increased Septembe}^r^{29, 2}⁰⁰^{7, to $9,8}¹⁵^billion.^{Debt li}^{mit increased Septem}^ber^{29, 2}⁰⁰^{7, to}
^$9,81^{5 billi}^on.
Figure 1. Components of Federal Debt As Percentage of GDP,
FY1980-FY2007

70%

60%

50%P
D
40% G
t of
30%en
erc
20%P

10%

0 983 986 98 9 99 2 9 95 998 001 004 00 7
198111111222
Fiscal Year
Held By Government AccountsHeld by the PublicTotal
^Source:^{OMB, Budget of t}^{he Un}^{ited States for FY2008, Historical Tables, February}²⁰⁰^{7; CBO.}
By the middle of May 2002, debt subject to limit had again risen to within $15 million of the ²⁵
statutory limit. At the FY2002 average spending rate, $15 million equaled about five minutes of
federal outlays. The Treasury, for the second time in 2002, used its statutory authority to avoid a
default. The Treasury’s financing problems, however, would persist without an increase in the
debt limit. On May 14, the Treasury asked Congress to raise the debt limit or enact other statutory
changes allowing the Treasury to issue new debt. A Treasury news release stated “absent
extraordinary actions, the government will exceed the statutory debt ceiling no later than May
16,” and that

²⁵^S^ee^Ta^b^l^{e A-1}^{, pre}^s^eⁿ^te^{d in}^the^A^p^pe^ndi^x^{, f}^o^{r de}^ta^ils.

^{a “}^d^{ebt issu}^aⁿ^{ce s}^u^spension^pe^{riod” w}^{ill begin}ⁿ^o^{later th}^aⁿ^Ma^y^{16 [2}⁰⁰²^]....^[^T^hⁱ^{s] allo}^w^s
^th^{e T}^r^easu^r^y^to^su^sp^eⁿ^d^o^r^r^e^d^eemⁱⁿ^v^e^st^m^eⁿ^t^{s i}ⁿ^t^w^o^tr^u^s^t^f^uⁿ^d^s,^w^h^ich^w^{ill p}^r^o^v^id^e²⁶
^f^l^e^x^ib^ilit^y^to^f^uⁿ^d^t^h^{e o}^p^e^r^a^tioⁿ^s^o^f^t^h^e^g^o^v^e^rⁿ^m^eⁿ^t^d^u^rⁱⁿ^g^t^h^{is p}^e^rⁱ^o^d^.
The Treasury reduced federal debt held by these government accounts by replacing it with non-
interest-bearing, non-debt instruments, which enabled it to issue new debt to meet the
government’s obligations. The Treasury claimed these extraordinary actions would suffice, at the
latest, through June 28, 2002. Without a debt limit increase by that date, the Treasury indicated it
would need to take other actions to avoid breaching the ceiling. By June 21, the Treasury had
postponed a regular securities auction, but took no other actions. With large payments and other
obligations due at the end of June and at the beginning of July, the Treasury stated it would soon
exhaust all options to issue debt and fulfill government obligations, putting the government on the
verge of a default.
During May and June 2002, Congress took steps to increase the debt limit. The FY2002
supplemental appropriations bill (H.R. 4775) passed by the House on May 24 included, after
extended debate, language allowing any eventual House-Senate conference on the legislation to
increase the debt limit. However, the Senate’s supplemental appropriations bill (S. 2551;
incorporated as an amendment to H.R. 4775, June 3, 2002) omitted debt-limit-increasing
language. The Senate leadership expressed strong reluctance to include a debt limit increase in the
supplemental appropriation bill. Instead, on June 11, the Senate adopted a bill (S. 2578), without
debate, to raise the debt limit by $450 billion to $6.4 trillion. At that time, a $450 billion debt
limit increase was thought to provide enough borrowing authority for government operations
through the rest of calendar year 2002, if not through the summer of 2003. With the possibility of
default looming over it, the House passed the $450 billion debt limit increase by a single vote on
June 27. The President signed the bill into law on June 28 (P.L. 107-199, 116 Stat. 734), ending ²⁷
the 2002 debt limit crisis.
On Christmas Eve, 2002, Kenneth Dam, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury sent a letter to
Congress requesting an unspecified increase in the debt limit by late February 2003, signaling ²⁸^th
that the $6.4 trillion debt limit would then be reached. The 108 Congress, still in the process of
organizing itself, did not immediately respond. Through the winter and into the spring, the
Treasury repeatedly requested that the debt limit be raised to avoid serious financial problems. By
February 20, 2003, the Treasury, as in 2002, used legislatively mandated measures to manage
debt holdings of certain government accounts to avoid reaching the debt limit. These actions
included the replacement of internally held government debt with non-debt instruments in certain
government accounts and not issuing new debt to these accounts. These actions allowed the
Treasury to issue additional debt to the public to acquire the cash needed to pay for the
government’s commitments or to issue new debt to other federal accounts.

²⁶^U^.^{S. D}^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^the^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^,^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^New^s^,^T^r^ea^su^{ry S}^t^a^t^em^en^t^on^t^h^{e Deb}^t^Cei^lⁱⁿ^g^,^Ma^y^14,²⁰⁰^2.
²⁷^For^a^dditi^ona^l^de^ta^ils^{, s}^e^e^U^.^S.^G^e^ne^r^a^{l A}^c^c^ountiⁿ^g^O^f^fⁱ^c^e^,^D^e^{bt C}^e^iling:^An^aly^s^is^of^Ac^tio^ns^D^u^rⁱⁿ^g^the²⁰⁰²^D^e^bt
^Issu^aⁿ^{ce Su}^sp^en^si^oⁿ^Perio^d^{, G}^A^O^-^03-¹³⁴^,^D^e^c^e^m^b^e^r²⁰⁰^2.
²⁸^Kenⁿ^e^t^h^Dam^,^Dep^u^t^y^S^ecret^ar^y^o^f^t^h^{e T}^r^easu^r^y^,^l^e^t^t^e^{r t}^o^S^p^{eaker o}^f^t^h^{e Ho}^u^s^e,^Dennⁱ^s^Hast^ert^,^Dece^m^b^{er 2}⁴^,²⁰⁰²^,
^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http://w^ww^.tre^a^s^.^g^ov^/pre^ss/re^le^a^s^e^s^/^po3⁷¹^8.^htm^.

Through the rest of February and into May, the Treasury held debt subject to limit $15 million ²⁹
below the debt ceiling. The adoption of the conference report on the FY2004 budget resolution
(H.Con.Res. 95; H.Rept. 108-71) on April 11, 2003, in the House triggered the “Gephardt rule”
(House Rule XXVII) that deems to have passed legislation (in this case, H.J.Res. 51) raising the
debt limit to accommodate the spending and revenue levels approved in the adopted budget ³⁰
resolution.
The Senate received the debt-limit legislation on April 11, but did not act until May 23, after
receiving further Treasury warnings of imminent default. On that day, debt subject to limit was
$25 million (or 0.0004%) below the existing $6.4 trillion limit. The Senate adopted the
legislation, after rejecting eight amendments and sent it to the President, who signed it on May

27. This legislation raised the debt limit to $7.384 trillion (P.L. 108-24, 117 Stat. 710).

In January 2004, CBO estimated that the debt limit, then set at $7.384 trillion, would be reached ³¹
the following summer. In June 2004, the Treasury asked Congress to raise the debt limit in order ³²
to avoid the disruptions to government finances experienced in the previous two years. In
August, and again in September, the Treasury declared that the debt limit would be reached in the
first half of October. On October 14, debt subject to limit reached $7,383.975 billion, just $25
million below the existing limit. The Treasury employed methods used in the previous two years
to keep debt under the legal limit. On October 14, Secretary of the Treasury John Snow informed
Congress, just before the election season break, that available measures to avoid breaching the ³³
debt limit would be exhausted by mid-November. Without an increase in the debt limit, the
Treasury would be unable to meet all of the government’s existing obligations, and the ³⁴
government could default.
Although the House passed a budget resolution for FY2005 in the spring of 2004, it did not reach
final agreement with the Senate on the measure. Without a budget resolution passed by Congress,
no resolution to raise the debt limit could be deemed passed by the House automatically under the
Gephardt rule. Consequently, no measure was available to send to the Senate. As the debt
approached the limit through the summer and into the fall, no legislation was moved to raise the
debt limit.

²⁹^T^h^e^T^r^e^a^s^u^r^y^r^e^duc^e^d^the^a^m^oun^{t of}^de^bt^he^ld^by^s^e^le^c^t^e^d^f^e^de^r^a^l^a^c^c^ounts^w^h^ile^{it s}^o^l^d^aⁿ^e^qua^l⁽^o^r^s^m^a^lle^r⁾^am^ount
^of^de^{bt t}^o^the^pu^blic^{. T}^h^is^r^a^is^e^d^c^a^s^{h ne}^e^d^e^d^to^pa^y^f^o^r^ong^oing^o^b^lig^a^tions^a^{nd k}^e^pt^the^de^bt^be^lo^w^the^lim^it.
³⁰^T^h^e^H^ous^e^B^udg^e^t^C^o^m^m^itte^e^has^s^o^m^e^dis^c^r^e^{tion in s}^e^tti^ng^the^de^{bt lim}^{it le}^v^e^{l in t}^h^e^House^Jo^{int re}^soluti^on
^g^e^ne^r^a^te^{d by}^the^G^e^pha^r^d^{t r}^u^le^.^S^e^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^{t 9}⁸^-⁴⁵³^,^D^e^bt-^L^imⁱ^t^Le^gis^l^atio^{n i}ⁿ^t^h^e^C^o^ngr^e^s^sⁱ^oⁿ^a^l^Bu^dge^{t Pr}^oc^e^s^s^,
^by^{Bill He}^niff^{Jr.; a}^{nd CRS Re}^por^{t RL}³¹⁹^13,^Devel^o^pⁱ^ng^Deb^t^-^Lⁱ^mⁱ^t^L^e^gⁱ^sl^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^:^T^h^{e Hou}^s^e'^s^"^G^ep^ha^rd^t^R^u^l^e^"^{, by}
^{Bill He}^nif^f^Jr.
³¹^U^.^{S. C}^ong^r^e^s^s^,^C^ong^r^e^s^sⁱ^ona^l^B^u^dg^e^t^O^f^fⁱ^c^e^,^The^Budge^t^a^nd^Ec^o^nom^ic^O^u^t^l^o^o^k^:^Fis^c^al^Ye^ar^s²⁰⁰⁵^to²⁰¹⁴^,
^J^a^nua^r^y^2004.
³²^A^l^an^F^r^a^m^,^“Coⁿ^g^{ress M}^a^y^Du^c^k^Deb^t^Lⁱ^mⁱ^t^Rai^s^e,^”^O^a^k^l^{and Tr}ⁱ^bune^,^J^u^ne^5,²⁰⁰⁴^.
³³^Johⁿ^W^.^Sn^ow^{, Se}^c^r^e^t^a^r^y^of^the^{U.S. T}^r^e^a^s^ur^y^,^le^tte^{r to Se}^na^te^M^a^jority^Le^a^d^e^r^{Bill Frist, Oc}^to^be^r^14,²⁰⁰⁴^,
^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http://w^ww^.tre^a^s^.^g^ov^/pre^ss/re^le^a^s^e^s^/^r^e^ports/^f^rist.pdf^.
³⁴^A^lthoug^h^not^a^{ll the}^pos^sⁱ^ble^c^oⁿ^s^e^que^nc^e^s^of^a^g^o^v^e^rⁿ^m^e^{nt de}^f^a^{ult a}^r^e^k^now^{n, it w}^ould^m^e^aⁿ^tha^t^the^g^o^v^e^rⁿ^m^e^nt
^c^ouldⁿ^o^l^ong^e^r^m^e^e^t^a^{ll of}^{its le}^ga^{l oblig}^a^tio^{ns. N}^o^t^only^the^de^f^a^{ult, b}^u^{t t}^h^e^e^f^f^o^{rts to re}^solv^e^{it w}^{ould a}^r^g^u^a^b^ly^ha^v^e
^ne^g^a^tiv^e^r^e^pe^r^c^us^sⁱ^ons^on^bo^th^do^m^e^s^tic^a^{nd inte}^rⁿ^a^tⁱ^ona^l^fⁱ^na^nc^ia^{l m}^a^r^k^e^t^s^a^{nd e}^c^onom^ie^s^.

Earlier, in September 2004, the House had added an amendment to the FY2005 Transportation-
Treasury appropriations (H.R. 5025) in an effort to remove the Treasury’s flexibility in financing
the government as federal debt approached and reached the existing limit. Without that flexibility,
the government would be unable to meet its financial obligations as the amount of debt neared the
limit. The legislation cleared the House, but the Senate did not act on it.
After the elections, Senator Frist, on November 16, 2004, introduced legislation (S. 2986) to raise
the debt by $800 billion, from $7,384 billion to $8,184 billion. The Senate approved the increase
on November 17, 2004. The House considered and approved the increase on November 18. The
President signed the legislation into law (P.L. 108-415, 118 Stat. 2337) on November 19, 2004.
Estimates made at that time anticipated the new limit would be reached between August and
December 2005.
Shortly before the increase in the debt limit, the Treasury delayed a debt auction and informed
Congress that it would invoke a “debt limit suspension period” as it had in previous years. The
increase in the debt limit in mid-November allowed the Treasury to reschedule the debt auction
and cancel, before it began, the “debt limit suspension period.”
Debt limit increases in 2005, 2006, and 2007 took a less dramatic path than those in President
Bush’s first term. In 2005, Congress included three reconciliation instructions in the FY2006 ^th
budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95, 109 Congress; April 28, 2005), the third of which directed the
House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Finance Committee to report bills raising
the debt limit. The instructions specified a $781 billion debt limit increase, to $8,965 billion, with
a reporting date of no later than September 30, 2005. Neither committee reported a bill to raise
the debt limit.
The adoption of the conference report on the FY2006 budget resolution in late April 2005 also
triggered the Gephardt rule (House Rule XXVII), producing a House Joint Resolution (H.J.Res.
47) that also would raise the debt limit by $781 billion to $8.965 trillion. Under the rule, the
resolution was automatically deemed passed by the House and sent to the Senate. Through the ^th
end of the first session of the 109 Congress, the Senate had not considered H.J.Res. 47, nor had
Congress considered a reconciliation bill raising the debt limit as called for in the budget
resolution.
At the end of December 2005, Secretary of the Treasury Snow wrote Congress that the debt limit
would probably be reached in mid-February 2006, although the Treasury could take actions that
maintain the debt below its limit until mid-March. He therefore requested an increase in the debt ³⁵
limit. In two more letters, sent on February 19 and March 6, Secretary Snow advised Congress
that the Treasury was taking measures within its legal discretion to avoid reaching the limit and
that these measures would suffice only until the middle of March 2006. Secretary Snow
authorized actions used previously by the Treasury, including declaring a debt issuance
suspension period. As March began, the government was again close to becoming unable to meet
its obligations. During the week of March 13 the Senate took up H.J.Res. 47. On March 16, the

³⁵^Jo^hn^W^.^Sⁿ^o^w^,^S^ecret^ar^y^o^f^t^h^{e T}^r^ea^su^r^y^,^l^e^t^t^e^{r t}^o^S^eⁿ^a^t^o^{r M}^a^{x B}^a^u^c^u^s^,^Dece^m^b^{er 2}⁹^,²⁰⁰⁵^,^avai^l^a^b^l^{e at}
^http:^//w^w^w^.om^b^w^a^tc^h.or^g^/^budg^e^t/pdf^/s^now^_de^btlⁱ^m^it_20^06.^pdf^.

Senate passed a debt limit increase after rejecting several amendments. The President’s signature
on March 20, 2006, then raised the debt limit (P.L. 109-182) to $8.965 trillion.
In mid-May 2007, Congress passed the conference report (H.Rept. 110-153) on the FY2008
budget resolution. The House’s Gephardt rule, triggered by the adoption of the conference report
on the budget resolution, resulted in the automatic engrossment of a joint resolution (in this case, ^th
H.J.Res. 43, 110 Congress) raising the debt limit by $850 billion to $9,815 billion, and sending
it to the Senate. At the end of July 2007, the Treasury asked Congress to raise the debt limit,
stating the limit would be reached in early October 2007. In August, the CBO Director said that
projections suggested that the limit would be reached in late October or early November. Without
an increase, the Treasury indicated that it would take steps within its legal authority to avoid
exceeding the debt limit. The Senate Finance Committee approved the House resolution (H.J.Res.
43) without changes on September 12, 2007. The Senate then passed the measure on September

27, which the President signed on September 29, 2007 (P.L. 110-91).

A serious economic slowdown, which started in the last quarter of 2007 according to many
economic forecasters, has led to sharply higher estimates of federal deficit spending in FY2008
and FY2009. The slowdown began with a rapid deceleration of housing prices and a rise in
interest rate spreads between private lending rates and benchmark Federal Reserve rates,
indicating an increasing reluctance of major financial institutions to lend to each other as well as
to firms and individuals. The effects of this slowdown will depend in large part whether market
difficulties remain concentrated in the housing and financial sector, or whether the downturn
spreads more widely through the economy.
An economic recession affects the federal deficit in several ways. First, falling prices of many
assets and equities can sharply reduce federal revenues from capital gains taxes and from the
corporate tax. Second, more difficult economic conditions may reduce tax revenues on earned
income and other income sources. Third, “automatic stabilizers” such as unemployment insurance
and income support programs pay out more money as unemployment rises and the number of
households eligible for means-tested benefits rises. An increase in deficit spending provides a
fiscal stimulus to the economy, if the output levels of goods and services produced in the nation
are below their potential levels. Deficit spending, however, can help accelerate inflation if output
levels are near or at potential levels, and in addition, exacerbates long-term fiscal challenges.
Several economists have expressed concerns that inflation, which had been relatively low since
the early 1980s, could accelerate due to rising prices of food, energy, and primary commodities.
While inflation would reduce the market value of the federal deficit, it would require Treasury to
pay higher nominal interest rates on federal debt.

In a March 2008 report, CBO estimated the President’s budget would lead to a $396 billion ³⁶
deficit in FY2008 and a $342 billion deficit in FY2009. Some private forecasters have predicted ³⁷
that the FY2008 deficit could reach $500 billion or more. At that rate, a higher federal debt limit
could soon become necessary. The House Concurrent Resolution on the Budget (H.Con.Res. 312)
recommended policies that would result in a $10.200 trillion debt in FY2009. The Senate
Concurrent Resolution on the Budget (S.Con.Res. 70) recommended policies that would result in ³⁸
a total debt of $10.278 trillion in FY2009. Implementing either set of policies would require an
increase in the federal debt limit. The conference agreement (H.Rept. 110-659) also recommends
spending levels that would lead to a debt subject to limit of $10.207 trillion in FY2009, a level
that would require an increase in the statutory debt limit.
The budget conference report passed the Senate on a 48-45 vote on June 4, 2008. The House
passed the measure on the next day by a 214-210 vote. The conference report recommends
spending levels that would lead to debt levels that would require an increased debt limit in
FY2009. House passage of the FY2009 budget resolution automatically created and deemed
passed legislation (H.J.Res. 92) that would increase the debt limit from its current level of $9.815
trillion to $10.615 trillion. The House passed an amended version of the Housing and Economic
Recovery Act of 2008 (H.R. 3221) by a vote of 272-152 that included a debt limit increase to
$10.615 trillion on July 23, 2008. The Senate then passed the measure on July 26 on a 72-13 vote.
The President signed the bill on July 30 (P.L. 110-289).
Concern over volatile conditions in financial markets may have put the debt limit increase on a
legislative fast track and tamped down debates over debt policy that accompanied previous debt
ceiling increases. On July 13, the U.S. Treasury announced that it would seek authority to support ³⁹
government-sponsored mortgage guarantee agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In early
July, financial markets reacted strongly to some analysts’ reports highlighting possible financial
vulnerabilities of the two guarantee agencies, prompting the U.S. Treasury to take action and ⁴⁰
design a series of measures to restore confidence in the agencies’ finances. Those measures
were incorporated into the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. In particular, the act
contains provisions that would temporarily authorize the Secretary of Treasury to extend a line of
credit to mortgage guarantee agencies Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. The act also created the a
new independent agency called the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which replaced the
Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
(OFHEO) and the Federal Housing Finance Board (FHFB).

³⁶^U^.^{S. C}^ong^r^e^s^s^,^C^ong^r^e^s^sⁱ^ona^l^B^u^dg^e^t^O
³⁶^G^o^l^d^m^aⁿ^S^ach^{s U.}^S^.^Research^,^“US^Dai^l^y^ffⁱ^c^e,^Analy^s^is^o^f^the^Pr^e^s^ideⁿ^t’^s^Bu^dge^t^a^r^y^Pr^op^os^als^fo^r^FY2⁰⁰⁹^{, Ma}^rc^h
²⁰⁰^8.
³⁷^G^o^ldm^a^{n Sa}^c^h^s^U^.^{S. R}^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^{, “}^U^{S D}^a^ily^:^T^h^e^Fis^c^a^l²⁰⁰^{8 D}^e^fⁱ^c^it—^Lⁱ^k^e^l^y^{to T}^{op $50}^{0 B}ⁱ^l^lio^n,”^Ma^r^c^{h 25}^{, 2}⁰⁰⁸^.
³⁸^{U.S. C}^ong^re^{ss, House}^Com^m^itte^e^{on t}^h^e^Bu^dg^e^t^,^Re^p^o^r^t^to^Ac^c^o^m^pany^H^.^C^{on. Re}^s^.³¹^2,¹¹⁰^th^Con^g^{., 2}^nd^sess.^,
^H^.^R^e^{pt. 1}^10-⁵⁴^3,^Ma^r^c^{h 2}⁰⁰⁸^,^p.^{99; U}^.^{S. C}^ong^r^e^s^s^,^Se^na^te^C^o^m^m^itte^e^on^the^B^u^dg^e^t^,^R^e^po^rt^to^A^cco^mp^an^{y S. R}^e^s.
⁷⁰^,^S^.^P^r^t.¹¹^0-⁰³⁹^,^M^a^r^c^h²⁰⁰⁸^.
³⁹^F^r^ed^dⁱ^e^M^{ac i}^s^o^f^fⁱ^ci^al^l^y^t^h^{e F}^e^d^e^ral^Ho^m^e^L^o^an^M^o^rt^{gage Co}^rp^oratⁱ^oⁿ^.^F^aⁿⁿⁱ^e^M^{ae i}^s^o^f^fⁱ^ci^al^l^y^t^h^{e F}^e^d^e^ral
^Na^tiona^{l M}^o^rtg^a^g^e^A^ssocⁱ^a^tion.
⁴⁰^Jo^hn^Cran^f^o^rd^,^“Di^m^en^si^oⁿ^s^o^f^{a M}^o^rt^{gage Cri}^sⁱ^s^,^”^{CQ Weekl}^y^{, J}^u^ly^{21, 20}⁰⁸^{, p}^.¹⁹⁷⁰^{; J}^e^f^f^r^ey^H^.^Bⁱ^r^nba^um^a^nd
^Christo^phe^{r T}^w^a^r^o^w^s^k^{i, “}^F^a^nnie^,^Fre^ddie^On^a^Tⁱ^g^h^trope^:^Mortg^a^g^e^Gⁱ^aⁿ^{ts Na}^vⁱ^g^a^te^Ma^r^k^e^t^V^o^la^tili^ty^{, Unique}^Role^,”
^Wa^shⁱⁿ^gt^on^Po^st^{, J}^u^ly^{29, 2}⁰⁰⁸^,^{p. D}⁰^1.

While CBO indicated that it was more likely than not that such intervention would not be needed, ⁴¹
it also estimated a 5% chance of a cost to taxpayers of more than $100 billion. Because debt
subject to limit was just $339 billion less than the debt ceiling of $9,815 billion when the Senate
passed H.R. 3221, some financial market participants may have worried that the debt limit,
without an increase, might have hindered the Treasury Secretary’s ability to intervene to support
Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. On September 7, 2008, the FHFA placed Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac in conservatorship, providing FHFA with the full powers to control the assets and operations
of the firms.
Since the deprivatization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the decision of the investment bank
Lehman Brothers to file for bankruptcy, the federal government has acted to provide stability to ⁴²
financial markets and has considered even more sweeping measures. On Saturday, September
20, 2008, the U.S. Treasury submitted a proposal to Congress to authorize the Treasury Secretary
to buy mortgage-related assets in order to stabilize financial markets. The Treasury proposal
would allow Treasury holdings of mortgage-related securities up to $700 billion and would raise ⁴³
the debt limit to $11,315 billion. The House introduced the Emergency Economic Stabilization
Act of 2008 (H.R. 3997), which incorporated the main tenets of the Treasury proposal including ⁴⁴
raising the debt limit to $11,315 billion. On September 29, 2008, however, the House rejected
this measure. On October 1, 2008, the Senate voted on, and passed, a different version of the
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (H.R. 1424) that included the same debt limit ⁴⁵
increase. The House passed H.R. 1424 on October 3, 2008 and it was signed into law by the
President (P.L. 110-343) on the same day, raising the debt limit to $11,315 billion.
The size of the debt may remain a concern in the future due to the size of impending federal
deficits necessitating further increases in the debt limit. CBO warns that the current trajectory of
federal borrowing is unsustainable and could lead to slower economic growth in the long run as
debt rises as a percentage of GDP.
Recently released reports, from both CBO and the Administration, estimate budget deficits will
be larger than had been expected. In their September 2008 report, CBO updated their previous
estimate on the FY2008 budget deficit. The new estimate, $407 billion, represented an increase of
$11 billion from their original estimate released in March. In addition, the agency warned that ⁴⁶
deficits may exceed $400 billion through FY2010. These figures exclude the cost of enacted and

⁴¹^C^ong^r^e^s^sⁱ^ona^{l B}^udg^e^t^O^f^fⁱ^ce^,^C^o^s^t^Es^tim^ate^f^o^r^H^.^R.³²²¹^“H^o^u^sⁱ^ng^an^{d Ec}^o^nom^ic^Re^c^o^v^e^r^y^Ac^{t of}²⁰⁰⁸^{” As}
^pas^s^e^d^by^the^Se^na^te^on^J^u^ly^11,²⁰⁰^{8, w}^ith^aⁿ^am^eⁿ^dm^eⁿ^{t tr}^ans^mⁱ^tte^{d to}^C^B^O^oⁿ^J^u^ly²²^{, 2}⁰⁰⁸^{, J}^u^l^y^{24, 20}^08,
^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http://w^ww^.c^bo.g^o^v^/^ftpd^oc^s/95x^x^/^doc⁹⁵^97/^hr3²²¹^.^pdf^.
⁴²^For^a^dditi^ona^l^inf^o^r^m^a^{tion s}^e^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^t^R^S²²⁹⁵⁶^,^T^h^e^C^o^s^t^of^G^o^v^e^r^nm^eⁿ^{t Fin}^ancⁱ^a^{l I}ⁿ^te^r^v^eⁿ^ti^ons^{, P}^a^s^t^an^d
^P^r^esen^t^{, by}^B^a^ir^{d W}^e^be^{l, Ma}^r^c^La^bonte^,^aⁿ^d^N^.^Er^ic^W^e^is^s^.
⁴³^U^.^{S. D}^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^,^“^F^a^c^t^She^e^t:^P^r^o^pos^e^d^T^r^e^a^s^ur^y^A^u^thor^ity^to^Pur^c^ha^s^e^T^r^ouble^d^A^s^s^e^ts^,”^P^r^e^s^s^r^e^le^a^s^e
^hp-¹¹^50,^Se^pt.²⁰^,²⁰^08,^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http^://w^ww^.tre^a^s^.g^ov^/^p^re^ss/re^le^a^s^e^s^/^h^p¹¹^50.^htm^.
⁴⁴^U^.^{S. C}^ong^re^s^s^,^H^ous^e^Fi^na^nc^ia^l^Se^rv^ic^e^s^Co^m^m^itte^e^,^E^m^e^r^g^e^ncy^Ec^onom^ic^Sta^b^iliz^a^tⁱ^{on A}^c^{t of}²⁰^{08 (A}^m^e^ndm^eⁿ^t
^{to t}^h^e^Se^na^te^Am^e^ndm^eⁿ^{t to H.R}^.³⁹⁹⁷⁾^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^htt^p^://w^ww^.h^ouse^.^g^o^v^/^a^pps/^lis^t/^pre^ss/fⁱ^na^nc^ia^l^s^v^c^s_de^m^/
^am^e^nd_0⁰¹^_x^m^l^.pdf^.
⁴⁵^U^.^{S. C}^ong^re^s^s^,^Se^na^te^Ba^nk^ing^,^H^ous^ing^,^aⁿ^{d U}^r^ba^{n A}^f^f^a^irs^Co^m^m^itte^e^,^E^m^e^r^g^e^ncy^Ec^onom^ic^Stabiliz^a^tio^{n A}^c^{t of}
²⁰⁰^{8 (}^I^{n t}^h^e^N^a^tur^e^of^a^Su^bs^tit^ut^e^{to H}^.^R^.¹⁴²⁴⁾^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^htt^p^:/^/baⁿ^kⁱ^ng^.s^eⁿ^a^t^e^.^g^o^v^/^pu^blic^/^_^f^ile^s^/
^la^te^s^t^v^e^r^s^ionA^YO^08C³²^_x^m^l^.pdf^.
⁴⁶^U^.^{S. C}^ong^r^e^s^s^,^C^ong^r^e^s^sⁱ^ona^l^B^u^dg^e^t^O^f^fⁱ^c^e^,^The^Budge^t^a^nd^Ec^o^nom^ic^O^u^t^l^o^o^k^:^An^U^p^d^a^te^{, Se}^pt.²⁰⁰^8.

proposed federal financial assistance programs and annual tax extenders currently under
consideration, including the alternative minimum tax patch, which would likely increase deficits
over this period.
The Administration, in its July 2008 Mid-Session Review, estimated a FY2009 deficit of $482 ⁴⁷
billion, an increase of $75 billion from their February estimate. The Administration’s FY2009
estimate excludes some costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the cost of the Housing and
Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-289), which became law on July 30, 2008, and the
Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 (H.R. 6331, P.L. 110-275), which
became law on July 15, 2008. Additionally, some military analysts believe that the Pentagon will
request as much as $100 billion or more in early 2009 to replace damaged, destroyed, and ⁴⁸
depreciated equipment and to fund war costs for the last few months of FY2009.
The Administration projects declines in the deficit beginning in FY2010, in part because of the
assumption of a prompt recovery from the economic slowdown of 2008, with economic growth
rates sharply higher than those estimated by most private forecasters. To the extent that actual
growth rates are less than the Administration’s projections, future deficits may be higher than
expected.

Since the late 1950s, the federal government increased its borrowing from the public in all years,
except in FY1969 following imposition of a war surcharge and in the period FY1997-FY2001.
The persistence of federal budget deficits has required the government to issue more and more ⁴⁹
debt to the public. The accumulation of Social Security and other trust funds, particularly after

1983 when recommendations of the Greenspan Commission were implemented, led to sustained ⁵⁰

growth in government-held debt subject to limit. The growth in federal debt held by the public
and in intergovernmental accounts, such as trust funds, has periodically obliged Congress to raise
the debt limit.
Between August 1997, when the debt limit was raised to $5,950 billion, and the beginning of
FY2002 in October 2001, federal budget surpluses reduced debt held by the public. From the end
of FY2001, the last fiscal year with a surplus, until the end of FY2007, debt held by the public
grew by $1,729 billion. Federal debt held in intergovernmental accounts has grown steadily
throughout the period, rising by $1,508 billion since the beginning of FY2002.
In early 2001, the 10-year budget forecasts projected large and growing surpluses, indicating
rapid reduction in debt held by the public. Some experts expressed concern about consequences ⁵¹
of retiring all federal debt held by the public. Most long-term forecasts computed at that time,

⁴⁷^O^f^fⁱ^c^e^o^f^Ma^na^g^e^m^e^{nt a}^{nd B}^udg^e^t^,^Mi^d^-^S^e^ssi^on^R^evi^ew^{, J}^u^ly²⁰⁰^{8, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^htt^p^://w^w^w^.^w^hite^hous^e^.^g^o^v^/^om^b/
^budg^e^t^/^f^y^2009/^pdf^/09m^s^r^.pdf^.
⁴⁸^{CRS Rep}^o^r^t^RS2²⁹²⁶^,^Co^{sts o}^f^Ma^jo^r^U.^S.^Wa^rs^{, by}^Ste^phe^{n D}^a^g^g^e^tt.
⁴⁹^T^h^e^a^b^ility^{to run}^fⁱ^sc^a^l^de^fⁱ^c^its^giv^e^{s the}^f^e^de^ra^{l g}^ove^rn^m^e^{nt use}^f^{ul f}^l^e^x^ibilityⁱⁿ^m^a^na^gⁱ^ng^{its f}ⁱ^na^nc^e^s^{, a}^ltho^u^g^h
^la^r^g^e^de^fⁱ^c^its^m^a^y^ha^r^m^ec^onom^ic^pe^r^f^or^m^a^nc^e^.^Se^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^{t R}^L³³⁶⁵^7,^R^uⁿⁿⁱⁿ^{g D}^e^fic^its^{: P}^o^s^iti^v^e^s^{and P}^itfa^lls^{, by}
^D^.^A^ndr^e^w^A^u^s^tin.
⁵⁰^Re^port^of^the^N^a^tio^na^{l Com}^m^is^sⁱ^on^on^Socⁱ^a^l^Se^c^u^rity^Ref^o^r^m^{, J}^a^nua^ry¹⁹⁸³^{, a}^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^htt^p^://w^w^w^.s^s^a^.g^ov^/
^his^t^or^y^/^r^e^por^ts^/^g^s^p^aⁿ^.htm^l.
⁵¹^T^e^s^tⁱ^m^on^y^of^Fe^de^r^a^{l R}^e^s^e^r^v^e^C^h^aⁱ^r^m^aⁿ^A^l^aⁿ^G^r^ee^ns^pa^{n, in}^U^.^S.^C^ong^r^e^s^s^,^Se^na^te^C^o^m^m^itte^e^{on t}^h^e^B^udg^e^t^,
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

however, showed large deficits emerging once the baby boomers began to retire. Short-term
forecasts projected continuous growth in debt held by government accounts, largely due to the
difference between Social Security tax revenues and benefit payments. The combination of falling
levels of publicly held debt and rising levels of debt held by government accounts moderated the
expected growth of total debt. The moderate growth in total debt those projections had forecast
was expected to postpone the need to increase the debt limit until late into the decade, when
accumulating debt in government accounts would overtake reductions in debt held by the public.
New budget projections released in early 2002 smashed expectations of large, persistent
surpluses, and hopes for reductions in debt held by the public collapsed. The return to large
federal deficits accelerated the growth of total debt. Increases in the debt limit would be necessary
much sooner than previously expected.
Early in 2003, the FY2003 deficit and the persistent rise in debt held by government accounts
drove the federal debt up to the $6.4 trillion limit in effect at the time. The Treasury avoided
breaching the limit into May. Congress adopted a debt limit increase of $934 billion on May 23,
2003, that provided enough room for the growing federal debt through the fall of 2004. The debt
limit increase passed by Congress late in 2004 was expected, at the time, to accommodate the
government’s debt growth well into 2005, if not into early 2006. In late December 2005, and
early in 2006, the Treasury informed Congress that the limit would be reached between mid-
February and mid-March 2006. On March 16, 2006, the Senate passed the House-initiated debt
limit increase, raising the debt limit to $8,965 billion. The debt limit crisis was resolved when the
President signed the debt limit increase on March 20.
Smaller than expected deficits in FY2006 and FY2007 postponed, but did not end the need for a
new, higher debt limit. The House passed legislation in May 2007 (H.J.Res. 43) to raise the debt
limit. The Senate passed the measure (P.L. 110-91) on September 27, which the President signed
on September 29. Turmoil in some financial markets in August 2007, according to some
observers, appeared to constrain contention over the debt limit increase.
The 2008 economic slowdown, which will reduce federal tax revenues and increase some federal
outlays, has caused forecasts of federal deficit spending to rise, thus bringing forward the
projected date when federal debt reaches its current limit. The House and Senate budget
resolutions (H.Con.Res. 312, S.Con.Res. 70), as well as the conference agreement (H.Rept. 110-
659), recommend spending levels that would require an increased debt limit. The House passage
of the budget conference report on June 5, 2008, under the terms of the Gephardt amendment, ^th
caused the automatic engrossment of a joint resolution (H.J.Res. 92, 110 Congress) that would
raise the debt limit by $800 billion to $10,615 billion. The measure was also then sent to the
Senate. The House passed an amended version of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of
2008 (H.R. 3221) that included a debt limit increase to $10.615 trillion on July 23, 2008. The
Senate passed the measure on July 26, and the President signed it on July 30.
While passage of H.R. 3221 provides sufficient borrowing capacity for the FY2009 congressional
budgeting process and enables the Secretary of Treasury to intervene aggressively in support of
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac if need be, the debt limit issue will likely return in the near future

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
^O^u^tlo^ok^for^t^h^e^Fe^de^r^a^{l Bu}^dge^t^a^{nd I}^m^plic^ati^ons^for^Fⁱ^s^c^{al P}^o^lic^y^{, h}^earⁱⁿ^gs,¹⁰⁷^th^Cong^.,¹^st^s^e^s^s^{., J}^a^nua^ry^{25, 2}⁰⁰¹^,
^a^v^a^ila^ble^a^t^http://w^ww^.^f^e^d^e^r^a^l^re^s^e^rv^e^.^g^o^v^/^boa^rd^doc^s/^te^sti^m^ony^/²⁰^01/²⁰⁰¹⁰¹^25/^de^f^a^ult.htm^.

due to a deteriorating fiscal situation in FY2008 and FY2009, in large part linked to turmoil in
financial markets, rising energy and commodity prices, and slowing economic growth rates. The
proposals currently under consideration, which contain further federal assistance for the financial
markets, also include provisions for another increase in the debt limit.
Over the next decade, without major changes in federal policies, persistent and possibly growing
deficits, along with the ongoing growth in the debt holdings of government accounts, would
increase substantially the amount of federal debt subject to limit. Unless federal policies change,
Congress would repeatedly face demands to raise the debt limit to accommodate the growing
federal debt in order to provide the government with the means to meet its financial obligations.

Drishnakumar, Anita S., “In Defense of the Debt Limit Statute,” Harvard Journal on Legislation,
vol. 42, 2005, pp. 135-185.
Gordon, John Steele, Hamilton’s Blessing: the Extraordinary Life and Times of Our National
Debt, New York: Penguin, 1998.
Hormats, Robert D., The Price of Liberty: Paying for America’s Wars from the Revolution to the
War on Terror, New York: Times Books, 2007.
Noll, Franklin, “The United States Public Debt, 1861 to 1975,” EH.Net Encyclopedia, edited by
Robert Whaples, May 26, 2004. Available at http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/noll.publicdebt.
Wright, Robert E., One Nation Under Debt: Hamilton, Jefferson, and the History of What We
Owe, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Table A-1, below, provides data on the dollar amount, in current dollars, of federal debt and the
changes in these amounts by month between the end of September 2001 (the end of FY2001) and
the end of August 2008. The table shows outstanding monthly balances of total federal debt, debt
held by government accounts, and debt held by the public. The final row shows the change for
each category for the entire period, September 2001 to August 2008.
All three measures of debt subject to limit increased over this period. From the end of September
2001 (the end of FY2001) to the end of September 2007 (the most recently completed fiscal
year), total federal debt increased by $3,275 billion, debt held in government accounts increased
by $1,522 billion, and debt held by the public increased by $1,753 billion. All three measures
experienced periodic reductions in some months. Because federal receipts and outlays are spread
unevenly over the fiscal year, debt may rise or fall in a given month, even if debt measures follow
an overall increasing trend.
Table A-1.Components of Debt Subject to Limit by Month,
September 2001-August 2008
^{(in millions of}^{current dollar}^s⁾
^Change^Change^Change
^from^{Held by}^from^from
^{End of}^previous^government^previous^{Held by the}^previous
^{month Total}^period^acc^ounts^period^public^period
^{Sept. 200}¹^$5,73^2,80²^—^$2,43^6,52¹^—^$3,29^6,28¹^—
^{Oct. 20}⁰¹^5,74^4,52³^$11,7²¹^2,45^1,81⁵^$15,2⁹⁴^3,29^2,70⁹^$–3,5⁷²
^{Nov. 200}¹^5,81^6,82³^72,3⁰⁰^2,46^9,64⁷^17,8³²^3,34^7,17⁶^54,4⁶⁷
^{Dec. 200}¹^5,87^1,41³^54,5⁹⁰^2,51^6,01²^46,3⁶⁵^3,35^5,40¹^8,22⁵
^{Jan. 20}⁰²^5,86^5,89²^–5,5²¹^2,52^5,75⁵^9,74³^3,34^0,13⁸^–15,²⁶³
^{Feb. 20}⁰²^5,93^3,15⁴^67,2⁶²^2,52^8,49⁴^2,73⁹^3,40^4,65⁹^64,5²¹
^{Mar. 20}⁰²^5,93^5,10⁸^1,95⁴^2,52^8,31⁸^–17⁶^3,40^6,78⁹^2,13⁰
^{Mar. 20}⁰²^5,91^4,81⁶^–20,²⁹²^2,54^9,43⁸^21,1²⁰^3,36^5,37⁸^–41,⁴¹¹
^{May 2}⁰⁰²^5,94^9,97⁵^35,1⁵⁹^2,55^3,35⁰^3,91²^3,39^6,62⁵^31,2⁴⁷
^{June 20}⁰²^6,05^8,31³^108,³³⁸^2,63^0,64⁶^77,2⁹⁶^3,42^7,66⁷^31,0⁴²
^{July 2}⁰⁰²^6,09^2,05⁰^33,7³⁷^2,62^7,98⁰^–2,6⁶⁶^3,46^4,07⁰^36,4⁰³
^{Aug. 20}⁰²^6,14^2,83⁵^50,7⁸⁵^2,62^0,94⁶^–7,0³⁴^3,52^1,89⁰^57,8²⁰
^{Sept. 200}²^6,16^1,43¹^18,5⁹⁶^2,64^4,24⁴^23,2⁹⁸^3,51^7,18⁷^–4,7⁰³
^{Oct. 20}⁰²^6,23^1,28⁴^69,8⁵³^2,68^0,81²^36,5⁶⁸^3,55^0,47²^33,2⁸⁵
^{Nov. 200}²^6,29^4,48⁰^63,1⁹⁶^2,68^0,78⁸^–24^3,61^3,69²^63,2²⁰
^{Dec. 200}²^6,35^9,41²^64,9³²^2,74^5,78⁷^64,9⁹⁹^3,61^3,62⁵^–67
^{Jan. 20}⁰³^6,35^5,81²^–3,6⁰⁰^2,75^3,30¹^7,51⁴^3,60^2,51¹^–11,¹¹⁴
^{Feb. 20}⁰³^6,39^9,97⁵^44,1⁶³^2,75^0,47¹^–2,8³⁰^3,64^9,50⁴^46,9⁹³

^Change^Change^Change
^from^{Held by}^from^from
^{End of}^previous^government^previous^{Held by the}^previous
^{month Total}^period^acc^ounts^period^public^period
^{Mar. 20}⁰³^6,39^9,97⁵⁰^2,72^2,81²^–27,⁶⁵⁹^3,67^7,16³^27,6⁵⁹
^{Apr. 20}⁰³^6,39^9,97⁵⁰^2,73^1,04²^8,23⁰^3,66^8,93³^–8,2³⁰
^{May 2}⁰⁰³^6,49^8,65⁸^98,6⁸³^2,75^5,89⁵^24,8⁵³^3,74^2,76³^73,8³⁰
^{June 20}⁰³^6,62^5,51⁹^126,⁸⁶¹^2,84^2,36¹^86,4⁶⁶^3,78^3,15⁸^40,3⁹⁵
^{July 2}⁰⁰³^6,70^4,81⁴^79,2⁹⁵^2,83^5,56⁶^–6,7⁹⁵^3,86^9,24⁷^86,0⁸⁹
^{Aug. 20}⁰³^6,74^3,77⁵^38,9⁶¹^2,82^9,38⁷^–6,1⁷⁹^3,91^4,38⁸^45,1⁴¹
^{Sept. 200}³^6,73^7,55³^–6,2²²^2,84^6,73⁰^17,3⁴³^3,89^0,82³^–23,⁵⁶⁵
^{Oct. 20}⁰³^6,82^6,66⁸^89,1¹⁵^2,86^9,49³^22,7⁶³^3,95^7,17⁵^66,3⁵²
^{Nov. 200}³^6,87^9,62⁶^52,9⁵⁸^2,87^9,11⁷^9,62⁴^4,00^0,50⁹^43,3³⁴
^{Dec. 200}³^6,95^2,89³^73,2⁶⁷^2,94^0,73⁶^61,6¹⁹^4,01^2,15⁷^11,6⁴⁸
^{Jan. 20}⁰⁴^6,96^6,85¹^13,9⁵⁸^2,95^1,21⁹^10,4⁸³^4,01^5,63³^3,47⁶
^{Feb. 20}⁰⁴^7,04^9,16³^82,3¹²^2,95^3,12³^1,90⁴^4,09^6,04⁰^80,4⁰⁷
^{Mar. 20}⁰⁴^7,08^8,64⁸^39,4⁸⁵^2,94^1,19⁵^–11,⁹²⁸^4,14^7,45³^51,4¹³
^{Apr. 20}⁰⁴^7,08^9,70⁰^1,05²^2,96^0,15¹^18,9⁵⁶^4,12^9,54⁹^–17,⁹⁰⁴
^{May 2}⁰⁰⁴^7,15^1,52³^61,8²³^2,97^3,86⁹^13,7¹⁸^4,17^7,65³^48,1⁰⁴
^{June 20}⁰⁴^7,22^9,32⁰^77,7⁹⁷^3,03^9,98⁷^66,1¹⁸^4,18^9,33⁴^11,6⁸¹
^{July 2}⁰⁰⁴^7,27^1,32⁸^42,0⁰⁸^3,03^3,39⁶^–6,5⁹¹^4,23^7,93³^48,5⁹⁹
^{Aug. 20}⁰⁴^7,30^5,53¹^34,2⁰³^3,03^7,14⁹^3,75³^4,26^8,38²^30,4⁴⁹
^{Sept. 200}⁴^7,33^3,35⁰^27,8¹⁹^3,05^6,59⁰^19,4⁴¹^4,27^6,76⁰^8,37⁸
^{Oct. 20}⁰⁴^7,38^3,97⁵^50,6²⁵^3,09^6,20⁷^39,6¹⁷^4,28^7,76⁸^11,0⁰⁸
^{Nov. 200}⁴^7,46^4,74⁰^80,7⁶⁵^3,08^7,83⁴^–8,3⁷³^4,37^6,90⁶^89,1³⁸
^{Dec. 200}⁴^7,53^5,64⁴^70,9⁰⁴^3,15^8,53¹^70,6⁹⁷^4,37^7,11⁴²⁰⁸
^{Jan. 20}⁰⁵^7,56^7,70²^32,0⁵⁸^3,17^1,08⁹^12,5⁵⁸^4,39^6,61⁵^19,5⁰¹
^{Feb. 20}⁰⁵^7,65^2,72⁶^85,0²⁴^3,17^6,40⁶^5,31⁷^4,47^6,32⁰^79,7⁰⁵
^{Mar. 20}⁰⁵^7,71^5,50³^62,7⁷⁷^3,17^5,46⁰^-946^4,54^0,04²^63,7²²
^{Apr. 20}⁰⁵^7,70^4,04¹^–11,⁴⁶²^3,18^5,36⁴^9,90⁴^4,51^8,67⁷^–21,³⁶⁵
^{May 2}⁰⁰⁵^7,71^7,57⁴^13,5³³^3,20^7,23²^21,8⁶⁸^4,51^0,34²^–8,3³⁵
^{June 20}⁰⁵^7,77^8,12⁸^60,5⁵⁴^3,28^0,91⁴^73,6⁸²^4,49^7,21⁴^–13,¹²⁸
^{July 2}⁰⁰⁵^7,82^9,02⁹^50,9⁰¹^3,27^8,72⁵^–2,1⁸⁹^4,55^0,30⁴^53,0⁹⁰
^{Aug. 20}⁰⁵^7,86^8,39⁵^39,3⁶⁶^3,28^4,69⁶^5,97¹^4,58^3,69⁹^33,3⁹⁵
^{Sept. 200}⁵^7,87^1,04⁰^2,64⁵^3,30^0,96⁹^16,2⁷³^4,57^0,07¹^–13,⁶²⁸
^{Oct. 20}⁰⁵^7,96^4,78²^93,7⁴²^3,34^5,58⁹^44,6²⁰^4,61^9,19³^49,1²²
^{Nov. 200}⁵^8,02^8,91⁸^64,1³⁶^3,35^1,09³^5,50⁴^4,67^7,82⁶^58,6³³
^{Dec. 200}⁵^8,10^7,01⁹^78,1⁰¹^3,42^4,30⁴^73,2¹¹^4,68^2,71⁵^4,88⁹
^{Jan. 20}⁰⁶^8,13^2,29⁰^25,2⁷¹^3,44^2,54³^18,2³⁹^4,68^9,74⁷^7,03²

^Change^Change^Change
^from^{Held by}^from^from
^{End of}^previous^government^previous^{Held by the}^previous
^{month Total}^period^acc^ounts^period^public^period
^{Feb. 20}⁰⁶^8,18^3,97⁵^51,6⁸⁵^3,45^7,40⁹^14,8⁶⁶^4,72^6,56⁷^36,8²⁰
^{Mar. 20}⁰⁶^8,28^1,45¹^97,4⁷⁶^3,44^3,60²^–13,⁸⁰⁷^4,83^7,84⁹^111,²⁸²
^{Apr. 20}⁰⁶^8,26^2,71⁸^–18,⁷³³^3,47^9,62³^36,0²¹^4,78^3,09⁵^–54,⁷⁵⁴
^{May 2}⁰⁰⁶^8,26^3,81²^1,09⁴^3,49^2,64⁸^13,0²⁵^4,77^1,16⁵^–11,⁹³⁰
^{June 20}⁰⁶^8,33^0,64⁶^66,8³⁴^3,56^6,18⁶^73,5³⁸^4,76^4,46⁰^–6,7⁰⁵
^{July 2}⁰⁰⁶^8,35^2,61⁴^21,9⁶⁸^3,56^9,55⁰^3,36⁴^4,78^3,06⁴^18,6⁰⁴
^{Aug. 20}⁰⁶^8,42^3,32¹^70,7⁰⁷^3,57^6,16⁶^6,61⁶^4,84^7,15⁵^64,0⁹¹
^{Sept. 200}⁶^8,42^0,27⁸^–3,0⁴³^3,62^2,37⁸^46,2¹²^4,82^8,97²^–18,¹⁸³
^{Oct. 20}⁰⁶^8,49^8,01⁶^77,7³⁸^3,65^0,24¹^27,8⁶³^4,84^7,77⁵^18,8⁰³
^{Nov. 200}⁶^8,54^5,71⁵^47,6⁹⁹^3,64^9,73⁶^–50⁵^4,89^5,97⁹^48,2⁰⁴
^{Dec. 200}⁶^8,59^2,51³^46,7⁹⁸^3,72^4,45⁰^74,7¹⁴^4,86^8,06³^–27,⁹¹⁶
^{Jan. 20}⁰⁷^8,61^9,49⁹^26,9⁸⁶^3,73^7,89⁴^13,4⁴⁴^4,88^1,60⁵^13,5⁴²
^{Feb. 20}⁰⁷^8,69^0,92¹^71,4²²^3,74^4,29⁹^6,40⁵^4,94^6,62²^65,0¹⁷
^{Mar. 20}⁰⁷^8,76^0,73⁵^69,8¹⁴^3,74^0,12⁷^–4,1⁷²^5,02^0,60⁸^73,9⁸⁶
^{Apr. 20}⁰⁷^8,75^3,07⁰^–7,6⁶⁵^3,77^8,25⁵^38,1²⁸^4,97^4,81⁵^–45,⁷⁹³
^{May 2}⁰⁰⁷^8,74^0,89²^–12,¹⁷⁸^3,79^2,20¹^13,9⁴⁶^4,94^8,69¹^–26,¹²⁴
^{June 20}⁰⁷^8,77^9,16⁸^38,2⁷⁶^3,86^7,81⁹^75,6¹⁸^4,91^1,34⁸^–37,³⁴³
^{July 2}⁰⁰⁷^8,84^5,41⁷^66,2⁴⁹^3,87^3,23⁹^5,42⁰^4,97^2,17⁸^60,8³⁰
^{Aug. 20}⁰⁷^8,91^8,49³^73,0⁷⁶^3,85^4,11⁵^–19,¹²⁴^5,06^4,37⁷^92,1⁹⁹
^{Sept. 200}⁷^8,92^1,34³^2,85⁰^3,90^3,71⁰^49,5⁹⁵^5,01^7,63³^–46,⁷⁴⁴
^{Oct. 20}⁰⁷^8,99^4,63⁹^73,2⁹⁶^3,95^8,35⁷^54,6⁴⁷^5,03^6,28¹^18,6⁴⁸
^{Nov. 200}⁷^9,06^5,82⁷^71,1⁸⁸^3,95^0,46⁸^–7,8⁸⁹^5,11^5,35⁸^79,0⁷⁷
^{Dec. 200}⁷^9,14^4,71⁵^78,8⁸⁸^4,03^8,56⁶^88,0⁹⁸^5,10^6,14⁹^–9,2⁰⁹
^{Jan. 20}⁰⁸^9,15^5,84²^11,1²⁷^4,05^3,19⁹^14,6³³^5,10^2,64⁴^–3,5⁰⁵
^{Feb. 20}⁰⁸^9,27^5,68³^119,⁸⁴¹^4,04^5,00⁷^–8,1⁹²^5,23^0,67⁶^128,⁰³²
^{Mar. 20}⁰⁸^9,35^8,13⁵^82,4⁵²^4,05^1,68⁵^6,67⁸^5,30^6,45⁰^75,7⁷⁴
^{Apr. 20}⁰⁸^9,29^8,56⁷^–59,⁵⁶⁸^4,08^0,88⁷^29,2⁰²^5,21^7,68⁰^–88,⁷⁷⁰
^{May 2}⁰⁰⁸^9,32^4,13⁷^25,5⁷⁰^4,07^1,99²^–8,8⁹⁵^5,25^2,14⁴^34,4⁶⁴
^{June 20}⁰⁸^9,49^2,00⁶^167,⁸⁶⁹^4,20^6,94²^134,⁹⁵⁰^5,28^5,06⁴^32,9²⁰
^{July 2}⁰⁰⁸^9,58^5,48⁰^93,4⁷⁴^4,18^2,09⁸^–24,⁸⁴⁴^5,40^3,38²^118,³¹⁸
^{Aug. 20}⁰⁸^9,64^5,75⁵^60,2⁷⁵^4,16^6,65⁵^–15,⁴⁴³^5,47^9,10⁰^75,7¹⁸
^Change,^3,91^2,95³^1,73^0,13⁴^2,18^2,81⁹
^{Sept. 200}^{1-Aug. 2}⁰⁰⁸
^Source:^{U.S. Treasury, Burea}^{u of the Pu}^{blic Debt,}^{Monthly Statement of the Public Debt}^{, Sept. 200}^1-^{Aug. 20}^08,
^{TreasuryDirect we}^{bsite; CRS calculations.}

^{D. An}^d^r^e^w^Au^s^tin ^Mⁱ^nd^y^R.^Le^vi^t
^An^al^y^s^{t i}ⁿ^Ecoⁿ^o^m^{ic P}^o^licy^An^al^y^s^{t i}ⁿ^P^u^b^{lic Fi}ⁿ^aⁿ^ce
^aau^s^tⁱⁿ^@^c^rs^.l^oc.g^ov^{, 7}^-⁶⁵⁵²^m^l^e^vⁱ^t^@^c^rs^.l^oc.g^ov^{, 7-}⁷⁷⁹²