LONDON -- The United States could lose its top credit rating for the second time from a leading agency if there's a delay in raising the country's debt ceiling, Fitch Ratings warned Tuesday.

Congress has to increase the country's debt limit, which effectively rules how much debt the U.S. can have, by the end of February or face a potential default, Fitch says.

There are fears that the debate will descend into the sort of squabbling and political brinkmanship that marked the last effort to raise the ceiling in the summer of 2011. Outgoing U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner warned then that it had nearly reached a point where government would be unable "to meet our commitments securely."

"The pressure on the U.S. rating, if anything, is increasing," David Riley, managing director of Fitch Ratings' global sovereigns division said at a London conference. "We thought the 2011 crisis was a one-off event .... if we have a repeat we will place the U.S. rating under review."

If that happens, Riley said there was "a material risk" of the rating coming down, which could mean the U.S. would face steeper costs when it comes to servicing its debt.

If Fitch does move to downgrade the US, it will join Standard & Poor's, which was so concerned by the dysfunctional nature of the 2011 debate that it stripped the U.S. of its triple A rating for the first time in the country's history.

Fitch already has a negative outlook on the U.S. as the country's debt burden has risen to around 100 percent of its annual gross domestic product, and has said it will make a decision on the rating this year, regardless of how the debt ceiling discussions pan out.

The U.S. government reached its statutory debt limit of nearly $16.4 trillion at the end of 2012 but is pursuing some extraordinary measures and can use some in-house deposits that should see it through to the end of February, according to Fitch.

Another major ratings agency, Moody's, also has a negative view on the U.S. outlook.

Riley's comments come just two weeks after U.S. lawmakers agreed to a budget deal with the White House that avoided the so-called fiscal cliff of automatic tax increases and spending cuts that many economists thought could plunge the U.S. economy, the world's largest, back into recession. Relief that a deal was cobbled together, albeit at the final hour, is one of the reasons why sentiment in the financial markets has been buoyant in the first trading days of the new year. Many stock indexes around the world are trading at multi-year highs.

"The `fiscal cliff' bullet was dodged .... (but it's) a short-term patch," said Riley.

Riley warned that the different arms of the U.S. government still have a number of issues to address. As well as increasing the debt ceiling, they have to agree to spending cuts that were delayed as part of the "fiscal cliff" agreement and back measures to avoid a government shutdown, potentially in March.

Though short-term fixes are more likely than not, Riley said the U.S. political environment is not as good as it should be for a country holding the gold-chip AAA rating. The past few years, Riley said, have been marked by "self-inflicted crises" between deadlines.

Overall, Fitch reckons the debt ceiling is "an ineffective and potentially dangerous mechanism for enforcing fiscal discipline."

The major reason behind the lack of swift action in the U.S. is that the Democrats control the White House and the Senate, while the Republicans have a solid majority in the House of Representatives. Both sides have differing visions of the role of the state in society and often varying political objectives.

Despite his cautious tone on the rating, Riley said the U.S. has a number of huge advantages and that getting the country's public finances into shape will not require the same level of austerity that many countries in Europe have had to enact over the past few years, partly because the U.S. economy is growing at a steady rate.

Other factors Fitch says support the U.S.'s AAA rating are the country's economic dynamism, lower financial sector risks, the rule of law as well as the global benchmark status of the country's bonds and the dollar.

However it says these "fundamental credit strengths are being eroded by the large, albeit steadily declining, structural budget deficit and high and rising public debt."

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • Arthur Laffer

    Laffer was the economist who proved the existence of the free lunch. His Laffer Curve showed, in theory, that cutting tax rates would actually increase tax revenue. He gave intellectual cover to those conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to be seen as contributing to a big deficit. He gave them a guilt-free way to cut revenue. There’s only one problem: Laffer’s ideas didn’t pan out in practice: Tax cuts don’t pay for themselves. Tax cuts are a major cause of our $16 trillion national debt. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • Pete Peterson

    If there’s one person who we can blame for making us feel guilty about the federal deficit, it’s Peterson, a hedge-fund billionaire who was a cabinet secretary in the Reagan administration. Peterson founded, funded or supported most of the institutions in Washington devoted to publicizing the problem of the deficit, including the Concord Coalition, the Peterson Foundation, The Fiscal Times, and the anti-deficit documentary “I.O.U.S.A.” Without Peterson’s billions and the guilt it bought, the deficit would be a fringe issue. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • Bill Clinton

    President Clinton made budget surpluses look easy. The budget was in the black the last four years of his administration. What’s worse, he made surpluses look like a sure thing. Clinton’s surpluses were partly the result of Washington going on a serious budget diet, with higher taxes paired with moderation in spending. But it was the booming economy — and higher taxes on capital income — that turned the modest deficits of the early Clinton years into surpluses. By the time Clinton left office, politicians were beginning to talk about perpetual surpluses, in exactly the same way that hucksters on Wall Street were talking about a perpetual bull market. And with exactly the same outcome. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • Alan Greenspan

    Greenspan was a high priest of both guilt and greed. He had always warned Congress about the dangers of the deficits, but his biggest failure as Federal Reserve chairman was the day in 2001 he told Congress that the worst thing it could do was pay down the debt because that would destroy the Treasury market and the Fed’s power to control the economy. That was the day he endorsed the Bush tax cuts. The Maestro’s endorsement gave intellectual cover to the conservatives who wanted to cut taxes, but who didn’t want to feel guilty. Greenspan also catered to our greedy side as a serial bubble-blower. He inflated the housing bubble in the 2000s by keeping interest rates low and by refusing to regulate the shadow banking system. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • George W. Bush

    No one is more responsible for racking up our debt than Bush. He campaigned in 2000 promising to cut taxes in order to avoid paying down the national debt. And when the recession of 2001 arrived, he said tax cuts would revive the economy. And when the economy didn’t revive, he cut taxes some more. Tax cuts for all occasions. And it was all guilt-free. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • Dick Cheney

    While Bush was busy cutting taxes, Cheney was busy planning the war on terror. For the first time in our history, we sent our military into battle without raising taxes at home to help pay for it. It added trillions to the debt. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • Grover Norquist

    As the head of a powerful lobbying and campaign-finance organization, Norquist forced almost every Republican officeholder to sign a pledge to never raise taxes under any circumstance. If anyone declined to sign or dared to violate the pledge, Norquist would back a primary challenger. The threat worked. The Norquist pledge blocked any possibility of a budget deal between Democrats and Republicans over the past two years. Democrats insisted that any plan to balance the budget must include more revenue as well as spending cuts, but Republicans held solid against any tax increase. There are signs that Norquist could be losing his hold on the party. Several Republicans won elections this year without signing his pledge, and several incumbents have said they don’t feel bound by the pledge any more. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • David Lereah

    Lereah was the chief economist for the National Association of Realtors and was perhaps the most enthusiastic and public cheerleader for the housing bubble. Even after the bubble began to deflate, Lereah still insisted that real-estate investments would never lose money. Of course, Lereah didn’t cause the bubble all by himself, but he does embody the greed that engulfed the real estate industry, the Wall Street banks that profited from it, and the homeowners who took on more debt than they could ever hope to repay. The housing and credit bubble led to the collapse of the financial system in 2008 and was the direct cause of the Great Recession and the ensuing $1 trillion-a-year deficits. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • Barack Obama

    Obama may be the perfect representative of our age, because he encapsulates our national schizophrenia over the budget. He honors both the greed and the guilt. He presided over the largest deficits in history, including a large fiscal stimulus, bailouts of the auto industry, and an expansion of the safety net. But Obama also lectures us about the need for the government to tighten its belt, even during a recession. He wants to raise taxes, if only on a few, and he’s expressed willingness to cut into the great middle-class entitlements. It was Obama’s administration that first suggested the bargain in 2011 that created the fiscal cliff. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>

  • John Boehner

    The House speaker is trapped in Grover Norquist’s world. He’s a pragmatic legislator who accepts that the government needs more revenue, but his caucus in the House doesn’t agree. In the summer of 2011, Boehner nearly forced the nation to default on its debt because he couldn’t deliver the votes necessary to raise taxes. In the end, Boehner was forced to punt the problem down the road. Today’s fiscal cliff showdown is the result of Boehner’s inability to lead the House Republicans to a deal. <a href="">Read more at Market Watch.</a>