Fitch Ratings to US: Fix 'fiscal cliff' or risk credit downgrade

Fitch Ratings, a leading credit ratings agency, warned Wednesday that the US is likely to lose its top-notch debt rating if lawmakers cannot agree to a solution that prevents the economy from going over the 'fiscal cliff' at the end of 2012. Fitch Ratings called the resolution of the fiscal cliff and an increase in the debt ceiling 'pressing issues.'

Jessica Rinaldi/Reuters/File
The Fitch Ratings building is seen in New York in this 2010 file photograph. Fitch warned Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2012 that failure to reach a deal on the fiscal cliff could result in a credit downgrade for the US.

 Fitch Ratings warned on Wednesday that the U.S. was more likely to lose its top-notch "AAA" debt rating if lawmakers and President Barack Obama cannot agree on how to cut the deficit and avoid the deep government spending cuts and tax increases that automatically would go into effect next year.

But the credit ratings agency said in a report that if a deficit-cutting plan is reached, the U.S. would likely keep its "AAA" rating. Fitch would then raise its outlook to stable from negative.

"Resolution of the fiscal cliff and an increase in the debt ceiling are pressing issues that the President and Congress must address if the U.S. is to avoid a fiscal and economic crisis," the report said.

In November, Fitch Ratings said Obama must work toward a credible plan to avoid the fiscal cliff or risk the U.S. losing its "AAA"rating. Fitch changed its outlook for the U.S. rating to negative last year after Congress and the Obama administration failed to meet a deadline for a plan.

In the first-ever downgrade of U.S. government debt, Standard & Poor's last year cut its rating from "'AAA" to "AA+" after the government failed to come up with a plan to reduce the deficit.

The U.S. has never failed to meet its debt obligations. The battle over raising the debt limit in August 2011 went to the last minute before a compromise was reached.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.