Ordinarily, NO, as this is passed in the normal course of business - this merely authorizes the issuance of debt instruments to finance the spending that was previously authorized.
But, now the answer is YES, when one party has decided to exploit this legal quirk separating the spending from the issuance of debt to execute a DOS attack on the other party currently in power.
>>Did people who pass the budget a few months ago get buyer's remorse?
Yes, since they are no longer in the driver's seat, they want to execute a DOS on the other party now in the driver's seat, and they don't care if it crashes the country or global economy, as they think they won't be blamed and the other party will.
It really is as simple as that, putting party over country.
But the party in power has 50 + tie-breaking VP vote? What gives?
It only takes 51 votes to change the filibuster rules, but at least 2 Democratic Senators oppose that, so we're kind of stuck.
60 votes are required to break the filibuster in the Senate, and whatever their private ideas (e.g., I've seen reports from credible sources that no less than 44 R Senators personally support raising the debt ceiling), there are apparently zero R votes to go against their leader and end the filibuster.
Interesting times.