This post (interfluidity) is the proximate cause of this post.
The government has conflicting powers and limits. Is the government so powerful that it can create a rock it can't lift? It is all about perceptions and trust.
Ignoring the current political maneuvering, I think there is a more fundamental divide. Some people look at the existing, incoherent, laws and see an intent to limit borrowing and use that as a basis for their position. Others look at the existing, incoherent, laws and see no technical limit on borrowing. (A large group looks at the existing, incoherent, laws and seems a political opportunity, but I want to ignore that.)
Those who see intent and want to follow it unless convinced that the earlier reasoning was incorrect, and those who see no technical barrier to doing what they see as correct are at odds. They are conservatives and progressives without the capitals. Even if both sets of people agree there is a problem that needs to be solved, if that tension cannot be resolved, teams don't function. The conservatives spend all of their time trying to nail down all possible procedural channels and technical loopholes -- which they generally aren't good at because they don't quickly see the loopholes -- and the progressives spend all of their time individually implementing new things -- which generally cause as many issues as they solve because the implementors are afraid to discuss the ideas before implementation.
I don't have a solution. I do have three observations that can help with the issue at a team level.
1. Recognize the problem and don't be afraid to reference both intent and technicalities.
2. Align rewards for everyone towards working together and outside goals
3. Get rid of the people who are motivated primarily by political maneuvering.
For a team, that's hard, especially when it is often managerially impossible to say that the system is stable at the moment and doesn't need change. Doing so means many people on the team leave for other positions, leaving the team unable to cope with the need for change later. Large scale politics seems even harder.