As the clock ticks toward a possible default on the national debt, Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (RCalif.) and top Democrats in Washingtonas well as media allies on both sidesare locked in a staring contest over who can take the matter less seriously.
The latest development in this slow-motion train wreck was a speech McCarthy delivered Monday from the New York Stock Exchange. “Debt limit negotiations are an opportunity to examine our nation’s finances,” he said, stressing that a bill to raise the nation’s debt limit would only get through the House if it was pared with spending cuts. The House will vote on such a bill within “the coming weeks,” McCarthy promised.
So far, so good. A debt default would be an economic catastrophe for the country and should be averted at all costsbut McCarthy is right that this is a good opportunity to examine America’s out-of-control borrowing habit. Raising the debt ceiling doesn’t authorize more borrowing. It merely gives the Treasury permission to borrow funds to pay for what Congress has previously agreed to spend. But it is the moment when past congressional budgeting decisions come home to roostthe equivalent of seeing your credit card statement after a blowout vacation that you couldn’t afford. You still have to pay the bills, but it should be a wake-up call.
But while McCarthy is saying some of the right things about this situation, he still doesn’t seem to have much of a plan for what to do. Monday’s speech was devoid of specifics beyond a promise to cut spending back to last year’s levelssomething he’s been proposing since January, just weeks after the passage of a year-end omnibus bill that hiked spending across the boardand some rather vague promises about tightening work requirements for welfare programs.
Notably absent from Monday’s speech was any promise about balancing the budget in 10 years, something that had been part of the House GOP’s earlier list of demands for the debt ceiling negotiations. AsReason has previously noted, it’s pretty much impossible to make the budget balance in a decade without making serious alternations to entitlement programs including Social Security and Medicare, and McCarthy has promised not to touch those as part of the debt ceiling package.
Importantly, it remains unclear whether even this narrower list of prospective ideas can pass the GOP-controlled House. Asked in an interview on CNBC just moments after his New York speech ended, McCarthy refused to give a straight answer about whether he had enough votes for this still-murky debt ceiling package.
As Democrats were quick to point out, McCarthy’s “plan” is little more than a series of starting points for negotiations. “What we got today was not a plan,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (DN.Y.) told NBC News after McCarthy’s speech. “It was a recycled pile of the same things he’s been saying for months.”
But, well, Democrats are just recycling the same things they’ve been saying for months too. The White House has been steadfast in refusing to negotiate with House Republicans until McCarthy presents a full-fledged budget proposal like the one President Joe Biden presented on March 9. “I don’t know what we’re negotiating if I don’t know what they want, what they’re going to do,” Biden reiterated to reporters over the weekend.
This is an unserious approach too. Both McCarthy and Biden (and everyone else involved) are well aware of why Democrats want to see a full Republican budget plan before they start negotiatingand it has very little to do with the debt ceiling. Instead, Democrats will pick apart the proposal to score political points by criticizing whatever spending cuts the House GOP outlines.
Indeed, Democrats and their allies are already eager to demagogue the bare bones of what McCarthy has outlined. Liberal Substacker Matt Yglesias says it is “irresponsible for Kevin McCarthy to run around threatening to blow up the global economy in order to snatch poor people’s health care away.” At Talking Points Memo,David Kurtz is already decrying the “draconian spending cuts” that McCarthy has proposed. That’s insane, because McCarthy’s so-called plan merely calls for rolling back federal spending to the level it was at in 2022a whole four months ago.
Here’s the really crazy thing: Even if Congress did somehow manage to hold the discretionary spending level next year, overall spending would still increase. That’s because the $1.7 trillion discretionary budget is only a fraction of federal spending. Other itemslike the so-called mandatory spending on entitlements like Social Security and Medicare as well as the rapidlyincreasinginterest costsconnected to the $31 trillion national debtwill continue to grow and drive federal deficits higher.
The crux of this problem is two-fold. First, Republicans have spent the better part of the past decade completely ignoring fiscal policywhile in many cases actively chasing out members who did care about this stuff. As a result, the GOP has very little institutional sense of what a solidly conservative federal budget would actually look like. Is there any spending plan that would get the support of all 222 Republican members right now? McCarthy doesn’t seem to know.
Second, Democrats have demonstrated an utter unwillingness to acknowledge that America has a serious borrowing problem, which must be the starting point for any negotiation about the debt ceiling regardless of what other policies may or may not end up being part of the final package. They don’t need to see a full budget proposal to acknowledge things like the Congressional Budget Office’s forecast that says the federal government is on track to spend $10.5 trillion on interest payments in the next decadeand more if interest rates remain higher than expected.
Why should Republicans put forth a budget plan when they know in advance that Democrats only want to use it to paint the GOP as a party of benefit-cutting skinflints? Why should Democrats negotiate in good faith when they know quite well that Republicans only care about fiscal responsibility when a Dem is in the White House? Neither side has much to gain from doing what the other wants, so no one moves.
But the impasse created by years of poor, myopic decision making in Washington is pushing the federal government ever closer to a dangerous cliff. McCarthy and Biden need to get serious about this, and soon.
Tesla (TSLA) is soaring in anticipation that Trump’s administration will make an easier path for Tesla’s self-driving tech, which still doesn’t work, to be approved federally.
Currently, self-driving technology is addressed at the state level, with each state having its own regulations for approving self-driving systems on its roads.
During a conference call following Tesla’s last earnings results, CEO Elon Musk, who has been financially backing the reelection of Donald Trump and “fully endorsed” him, hinted that he could work with the new federal government to get a federal self-driving approval process going.
Now, Bloomberg reports that Trump’s transition team is discussing making it a priority:
Members of President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team have told advisers they plan to make a federal framework for fully self-driving vehicles one of the Transportation Department’s priorities, according to people familiar with the matter.
This news sent Tesla’s stock up 7%, or an increase of 470 billion in value.
That’s surprising because before now, the regulatory aspect of Tesla’s self-driving effort didn’t seem like the biggest hurdle – making the technology work still seems to be the biggest hurdle.
Tesla has been wrong about its self-driving timeline too many times to count, but the latest one is to release unsupervised self-driving in California and Texas in Q2 2025.
Tesla has not released any data about its self-driving effort, and therefore, the best data available is crowdsourced. That data currently shows about 241 miles between critical disengagement:
Tesla would need a 2,500x improvement in miles between disengagement to reach a safer-than-human level, which has been the goal before getting regulatory approval.
Electrek’s Take
That sounds like a much bigger hurdle than getting regulatory approval.
I actually agree with the Trump administration that it makes more sense to have a federal framework for approving self-driving systems than at the state level.
But I don’t see how it will help Tesla since there’s no clear path to Tesla achieving a level safer than human with their current approach any time soon.
At the current pace, the 2,500x improvement would take 10 years and we have yet to see a significant acceleration to the pace of improvement.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
What a week it was in college football: Five AP Top 25 teams lost to unranked opponents, and after No. 6 BYU’s defeat to Kansas, the Big 12 appears to be up for grabs after victories by Colorado and Arizona State.
The Buffaloes and Sun Devils have proved football fans wrong this season as Colorado is tied for the top spot in the Big 12 and Arizona State is a game behind. With both teams on a winning streak, what can they credit for their success?
After a rough start to the season, Billy Napier and Florida have turned things around and the Gators are one win from bowl eligibility. With an upset win over No. 22 LSU, is it time to stop questioning Napier?
Our college football experts break down key storylines and takeaways from Week 12.
Losses might be as important as wins in the CFP committee meeting room
With six new committee members, a new committee chair and a new College Football Playoff executive director, there are a lot of new faces at selection central. Each group is different. Ranking the top 25 teams is a subjective system, and this year’s committee appears to be putting an emphasis on losses — maybe more than in years past.
Who teams lose to and how has always mattered, but it might be more of a factor this year with multiple two-loss teams to sort through. It’s also a big reason why Ohio State is No. 2 and Penn State is No. 4 — close losses to highly-ranked teams. It’s never a good time for a bad loss, but it could mean the difference this year between a first-round bye, a first-round home game — or a seat on the couch. — Heather Dinich
Rivalries matter more than ever
Texas has never viewed Arkansas on par with rival Oklahoma, but Arkansas lives to torment Texas. Three years ago, the No. 15 Longhorns came to Fayetteville and were stomped 40-21. Jubilant Arkansas fans stormed the field.
But returning as conference rivals for the first time since the Razorbacks left the Southwest Conference in 1991 seemed to mean something to No. 3 Texas, too, after a tough 20-10 win over the 5-5 Razorbacks. “It was personal for sure,” senior edge rusher Barryn Sorrell said.
Quinn Ewers sealed the win by running for three yards on fourth-and-2 with 2:14 left. Rather than trying to evade linebacker Larry Worth III, Ewers decided to bull his way over him. “I just tried to put a little statement into it, that’s all,” Ewers said with a smile. “Just the history that these two programs have together, it’s going to be tough.”
Texas joining the SEC reconnected old grudge matches with Texas A&M and Arkansas. The 74,929 who showed up Saturday — the 10th-largest crowd in Arkansas history — threw their Horns Down at every opportunity. With an eight-game SEC schedule, there’s only one permanent rivalry guaranteed per school, and for the Longhorns, that will always be Oklahoma. Texas-Arkansas and Texas-Texas A&M could come and go. When college football is becoming more unrecognizable by the day, regional rivalries should be a priority. — Dave Wilson
Congrats to Colorado and Arizona State for proving us all wrong
It’s probably time to admit we were wrong about Deion Sanders’ Colorado and Kenny Dillingham’s Arizona State in 2024.
OK, maybe not all of us. But as both schools improved to 8-2 on Saturday, a preseason poll from CBS Sports resurfaced that ranked Sanders and Dillingham, respectively, as the 15th- and 16th-best coaches among the Big 12’s 16 football programs. And whether you had either coach/program that low in August, there can’t be many of us who expected either school to be here in Week 12: level alongside Iowa State for second in the Big 12 standings and in line to play at least some kind of role in the College Football Playoff picture over the final weeks of the regular season.
Colorado earned its fourth win in a row and Travis Hunter logged another entry to his Heisman Trophy résumé in a 49-24 win over Utah on Saturday, yet Sanders says the Buffaloes still “haven’t even played our best game.” Meanwhile, Arizona State reached its highest win total since 2021 on Saturday night after storming to a 21-0 first-half lead and holding off No. 16 Kansas State after halftime in a 24-14 road win, fueled by the aerial connection between Sam Leavitt (275 passing yards, three touchdowns) and Jordyn Tyson (12 catches, 176 yards, two touchdowns).
The successes at Colorado and Arizona State are a credit to the respective coaching jobs Sanders and Dillingham are executing. They’re also a credit to the concept that there remain many different paths to winning in a seemingly homogenized era of college football dominated by NIL, the transfer portal and the rest. Through 12 weeks, Colorado and Arizona State represent two of the sport’s great surprises this fall, and there are perhaps no two people more acutely aware of the doubters than the coaches leading this pair of impressive turnarounds in 2024.
“We were a three-win team twice,” Dillingham said Saturday night. “We were under NCAA sanctions. Most head coaches, to be brutally honest, you get fired if you take a job under sanctions. You don’t survive. You’re hired to be fired. That’s the nature of the beast. And right now we’re sitting here at 8-2 and couldn’t be prouder.” — Eli Lederman
South Carolina is clearly the nation’s best three-loss team
Shane Beamer’s team is not part of the logjam atop the SEC. The Gamecocks are not in the College Football Playoff mix, essentially eliminated Oct. 12 when they couldn’t hold a fourth-quarter lead at Alabama or tie the score in the closing minute. But since falling to 3-3 in Tuscaloosa, South Carolina has won four straight and continued to be one of the most consistently compelling squads on Saturdays.
After riding Kyle Kennard and the defense to wins over Oklahoma, Texas A&M and Vanderbilt, South Carolina needed the offense to outlast Missouri, going 70 yards in 47 seconds to score the winning touchdown with 15 seconds left. Redshirt freshman LaNorris Sellers is blossoming into one of the nation’s best young quarterbacks, as he set career highs for passing yards (353) and passing touchdowns (five) against Missouri. South Carolina has defeated three straight AP-ranked opponents for the first time in team history.
“We’re on the right track,” Beamer said. “The young players we have in this program right now, the quarterback, Dylan [Stewart]. You talk about the recruits that are here tonight, the ones that are committed to us. The best days of South Carolina football are right in front of us.”
There will be some what-ifs for the Gamecocks, especially in their losses to LSU and Alabama. But after a 5-7 season last fall, Beamer has recaptured his big-game magic and built a program that no opponent should want to face right now. — Adam Rittenberg
A resolute Billy Napier and his Florida team just keep getting back up
When it starts to go bad for a coach in the SEC, especially one who’s in his third season and has yet to manage a winning record, it’s usually like a two-ton truck cresting over an icy slope.
There’s no stopping the slide.
Even with the recent and dreaded vote of confidence for Florida’s Billy Napier, there are no guarantees about his future. But nobody would have predicted he had any future at Florida two months ago after an ugly home loss to Texas A&M, two weeks removed from a 41-17 beatdown by Miami at home. The speculation late that night was that Napier might be out as early as the next morning.
But he had just enough support in key areas to hang on, and most importantly, the players in his locker room still believed in him. And here we are, with two weeks left in the regular season, and the Gators are one win away from bowl eligibility after taking down LSU 27-16 at home Saturday. Another huge opportunity awaits this weekend when No. 11 Ole Miss visits the Swamp.
The Gators (5-5) have been resilient, just like their coach, and responded from a 49-17 blowout loss at Texas to play one of their most complete games of the season at home against LSU. Simply making a bowl game is hardly the standard at Florida, but the way Napier has kept his team together, continued to develop young quarterback DJ Lagway and gone about his business with accountability, humility and a quiet confidence is proof he deserves a fourth season to show he can get this program to that standard.
It’s time to get behind Napier and quit questioning him. It’s clear the Gators have a talented nucleus of younger players and that those players have their coach’s back. — Chris Low
Louisville … what are you doing?
Stanford vs. Louisville was an inconsequential game that should have flown under the radar, regardless of the result. And while the outcome — a Stanford win that ended a six-game losing streak — was a significant upset, it’s the way it happened that deserves some added attention. It might be the most improbable way a team has lost a game all season. Let’s dive in.
After trailing 35-21 in the fourth quarter, Stanford scored touchdowns with 6:37 left and 45 seconds left to cut the deficit to 35-34. At this point, I thought Stanford coach Troy Taylor, a coach who once went an entire high school season without punting, would go for the win with a 2-point conversion try. He did not. Tie score.
On the ensuing kickoff, Louisville opted against taking the ball at the 25-yard line and returned it to the 19. After a spike, a deep shot, a short pass and another deep shot all fail, Stanford took possession at its 45 with 4 seconds left. Overtime felt inevitable. Wrong.
Stanford completed a 1-yard pass only to be gifted 15 yards by an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty by Louisville, giving the Cardinal a chance to win the game on a 57-yard field goal attempt. Improbable, still. So, what does Louisville do: jumps offside to make the kick easier. And Stanford’s Emmet Kenney took advantage, making a 52-yard field goal as time expired.
An all-time collapse. — Kyle Bonagura
Kennesaw State’s Bohannon shows class on way out
Last weekend, Kennesaw State fired coach Brian Bohannon, who helped build the program from scratch nine years ago, then ushered it from the FCS into the FBS this season. That firing didn’t stop the former FCS Coach of the Year from supporting his players before its game Saturday against Sam Houston.
In a video posted by a Kennesaw State football alum, Bohannon showed up to the team’s pregame walk to the stadium and gave the players hugs and high-fives as they walked by.
The Owls ultimately lost in overtime to fall to 1-9 but showed fight against the Bearkats, who remain in contention for the Conference USA title.
Despite being fired, Bohannon should be revered in Kennesaw for taking the Owls to the FCS playoffs four times, for elevating the program to the FBS — and for the way he graciously exited. — Jake Trotter
Archaeologists have uncovered a remarkable 2,000-year-old Roman knife handle in Northumberland, England. The discovery, made in the River Tyne near Corbridge Roman Town, features a detailed depiction of a gladiator. This unique find sheds light on the influence and popularity of gladiators across the Roman Empire, including its farthest reaches in Britain.
As per a report by English Heritage, the handle, crafted from copper alloy, portrays a secutor gladiator, identifiable by his heavy armour and helmet. Secutors, named after the Latin term for “chaser,” were known for engaging in close combat against their agile counterparts, the retiarii. Notably, the figurine represents a left-handed fighter, a rarity in Roman culture, where left-handedness was often considered inauspicious. Researchers from English Heritage have suggested that this specific detail may indicate the handle was modelled after an actual gladiator, rather than serving as a general representation.
Gladiator Culture in the Roman Empire
Gladiatorial games were a significant feature of Roman public entertainment, drawing large crowds to amphitheatres across the empire. While these fighters were typically enslaved individuals or criminals, some gained celebrity status, despite their marginalised social standing. The events, often hosted by elite Roman citizens or emperors, aimed to display power and wealth.
Frances McIntosh, Collections Curator for Hadrian’s Wall and the North East at English Heritage, stated that gladiators’ popularity extended far beyond Rome, a fact underscored by the discovery of this artefact. Although memorabilia such as pottery and figurines have been documented, similar finds in Britain are considered rare.
Plans for Public Display
Corbridge Roman Town, originally established as a supply base in 79 AD, served as a key site during the Roman occupation of Britain until around 400 AD. English Heritage plans to exhibit the knife handle, along with other artefacts recovered from the river, at the Corbridge site next year.
This discovery continues to emphasise the enduring fascination with gladiators, both in ancient times and modern culture.