It's not every day you see Elizabeth Warren and Donald Trump on the same side of an issue. But on Wednesday, the Massachusetts senator did something that might raise a few eyebrows: she agreed with the president on scrapping the debt ceiling entirely.
Warren took to X to make her case, writing, "Donald Trump is right about this: Eliminate the debt limit—its only real function is to threaten an economic crisis." She added that she's ready to work with both parties to "scrap the debt ceiling and protect the economy."
That's a pretty big deal. The debt ceiling has been a political football for years, with both parties using it as leverage to extract concessions. Warren's argument is that it's a pointless risk—why create a crisis when you can just not have one?
But not everyone is buying it. Anthony Pompliano, CEO of Professional Capital Management and a well-known crypto and macro investor, had a characteristically blunt response. He reposted a screenshot of Warren's remarks with the caption: "This probably goes so hard if you are stupid."
Ouch. Pompliano's point, presumably, is that eliminating the debt ceiling removes a crucial check on government spending—one that, in theory, forces lawmakers to confront the country's growing debt. Without it, there's no limit at all.
The Debt Situation: $40 Trillion and Counting
The timing of this debate is no accident. The U.S. national debt is currently sitting at nearly $39.7 trillion, and the borrowing limit is about $41.1 trillion. That's a lot of zeros. According to a Politico report, independent forecasts suggest the government could hit the so-called X-date—when it can no longer meet all its obligations—sometime between next summer and early 2028.
Republicans are already thinking ahead. They raised the debt ceiling by $5 trillion last year, and now they're reportedly weighing another increase. White House officials have discussed including it in a Republican-backed spending package before the November midterm elections. Why? Because if Republicans lose control of one or both chambers of Congress, they'd rather not have to negotiate with Democrats on this.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) acknowledged the issue on Wednesday, telling reporters, "$40 trillion in debt, seems to me, should get our attention." He suggested Congress could address the borrowing limit during the lame-duck session after the election but before the next Congress is seated.
The Treasury Department is expected to hit the current borrowing cap sometime in the first half of next year, though it can use temporary accounting measures to keep paying the bills for a few more months. So there's some time, but not a lot.
What's the Big Deal?
The debt ceiling is one of those Washington traditions that everyone hates but no one seems able to get rid of. It's a self-imposed limit on how much the government can borrow, and it's been raised or suspended dozens of times over the years. But every time it comes up, there's a risk of default if Congress doesn't act—and that could trigger a financial crisis.
Warren's argument is that the risk isn't worth it. If the debt ceiling's only real function is to threaten an economic crisis, why keep it? Trump has made similar noises, though his motives might be different—he's never been a fan of constraints on his power.
Pompliano's retort, meanwhile, reflects a different view: that the debt ceiling is a necessary evil, a forcing mechanism for fiscal discipline. Without it, what's to stop politicians from spending even more?
Both sides have a point. But with debt approaching $40 trillion and another deadline looming, the debate is only going to get louder.
