Arkansas’ four congressmen today voted against H.R. 1954, the bill that would raise the country’s debt ceiling past its current $14.3 trillion limit. The bill failed with not a single Republican voting for it.

This does not mean the debt ceiling won’t be raised. There is still plenty of time before the country runs up against the time limit and begins to fail to make good on its obligations. The press releases I have received – from Reps. Ross, Griffin and Womack – indicate that the congressmen voted against the bill because it included no structural spending reforms.

I’m fine with that. For a long time, deficits in Washington have been all-too-business as usual. Ultimately, Congress will have to vote to raise the ceiling – and it will, despite all the saber-rattling. Let’s hope the congressmen get what they want and that the bill includes spending reforms.

Here are the statements released by the three congressmen, in the order that I received them. I have not yet heard from Rep. Rick Crawford from the First District.

ROSS – “I voted against raising the nation’s debt ceiling today because we’ve got to send a strong message that it’s past time to stop the out-of-control spending in Washington. Before I can support any increase in the debt ceiling, it must include meaningful spending cuts that will actually reduce our deficits without punishing America’s working families and seniors.

“The debt ceiling isn’t about new spending; it’s about meeting the debts and obligations we’ve already committed. It has been increased 36 times over the last 30 years, with President Reagan signing 17 debt limit increases into law and President Obama signing three so far. The debt ceiling problem isn’t new, but it’s reached a level that is unsustainable. Congress needs to stop the partisan bickering and start working together to draft a commonsense compromise that preserves America’s standing in the global economy, cuts spending and reduces our deficit.

“Instead of playing games with the debt limit, we should instead focus on how to get our nation’s fiscal house back in order. That’s why I have worked hard as co-chair of the fiscally conservative Democratic Blue Dog Coalition to pass components of our Blueprint for Fiscal Reform, cosponsoring 15 deficit or debt reducing bills, many of which have become law. This Congress, I’ve also voted to cut $38 billion from the 2011 budget and am working hard to build support for the Blue Dog Benchmarks for Fiscal Reform, which aims to cut the deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade. Reducing our deficit is and will continue to be my focus in Congress as a fiscal conservative and as a Representative from Arkansas.”

GRIFFIN – “Tonight, I voted ‘No’ to raising the national debt limit and will remain opposed to raising it without serious structural spending reform. Neither the President nor Senator Reid has a plan to deal with the federal government’s out-of-control spending, but the House does. They should adopt the House’s reforms to save Medicare, reduce spending and encourage private-sector job creation. I understand the gravity of what is at stake and addressing the root cause of the debt—out-of-control spending—is the only way forward.”

WOMACK – “I have said all along that the fiscal situation facing our nation is among our highest priorities in Congress. It is unconscionable to consider an increase in the debt ceiling without significant and guaranteed limits on federal spending.

“We cannot continue to add to the burden of future generations by ignoring our obligation to control spending.”

My Arkansas News Bureau column this week is about the Medicare reform plan passed by Republicans in the House of Representatives April 15. It was supported by all three freshman Republicans from Arkansas.

The plan replaces Medicare as we know it with a voucher system that would give each senior $15,000 to purchase private health insurance starting in 2022.

My take is that while I appreciate Republicans for at least addressing the problem, it’s the wrong plan as a policy and politically. It’s the wrong as a policy because, just like President Obama’s health care plan, it relies on the private insurance industry, which I believe is as much to blame for our current problems as the government because private insurance only pretends to be a free market solution but doesn’t really behave like one. Because of it, consumers don’t make their purchasing decisions at the point of sale, which is what makes the free market work.

I didn’t say how to fix it in the column, which I should have, but the truth is, I don’t know. Americans are going to have to pay for more of their own health care. Insurance should insure against catastrophic loss, not pay to “treat” every sniffle, with a safety net staying in place for the poor.

The other problem with the Ryan plan is that it is wrong politically. It will never pass, which makes it a distraction, and it has made Republicans vulnerable in the upcoming elections.

Here is the column.

My Arkansas News Bureau column is about one issue in which Arkansas’ two senators, Democrat Mark Pryor and Republican John Boozman, disagree: a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Boozman is for it; Pryor against it.

The column presents arguments for and against the idea, and there are plenty of good ones on both sides. Best argument for it: We can’t seem to balance the budget without it. Best argument against it: Judges would take over the budget process. Plus it’s a copout.

Here is the column.

My column this week points out that Sen. John Boozman and Sen. Mark Pryor did something seemingly rare this past week for a Republican and Democrat: They agreed on something.

The two Arkansas senators introduced the Safe Roads Act, which would create a nationwide database for truck drivers with drug and alcohol violations. Currently, trucking companies must rely on those drivers to self-report their violations when they hire them – which they don’t always do.

My point: If the two senators can agree on this relatively minor piece of legislation, can they work together to balance the federal budget? They had better, for the good of us all.

Here is the column.