Isn't it time for President Obama to invoke the 14th Amendment?

[ProudLefty]

My Republican Representative is a first termer. He is a TEA Partier. He "explained" to me that there is no reason to raise the debt ceiling; we will just live within our means from now on.

Afterwards a friend laughed and said "I see you've met our bankrupt rodeo clown." I said "Huh?" and my friend replied "Yeah. his next to last job before being elected to Congress was as a rodeo clown. And before that he couldn't pay his bills and he went bankrupt."

I only mention this because it is has become clear that the TEA Partiers are inexperienced and have not done their homework. They are determined to destroy the economy just so Barack Obama takes a hit.

My own reaction is that President Obama needs to use the 14th Amendment, announce the crisis is over, and let us move on. Some one wants to sue him, fine.

Let me refresh everyone's memory of what Section 4 of the 14th Amendment actually says.

"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void."

Can there be any doubt but what the President is in fact obligated to pay our bills as they come due?

If we are indeed spending more than we take in, then let the House do their job, and fix it.

 

[steveox]

Its against the law and its an Impeachable offense.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...chment-in-response-to-14th-amendment-solution

 

[Openmind]

Its against the law and its an Impeachable offense.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...chment-in-response-to-14th-amendment-solution

I wouldn't be so sure. There seem to be many questions about this, and no definite answer.

But, I'm sure Obama will know a lot better than me. . .and you!

 

[Gipper]

I wouldn't be so sure. There seem to be many questions about this, and no definite answer.

But, I'm sure Obama will know a lot better than me. . .and you!

Yeah...BO is the smartest man in the world. If only he could be our Dear Leader (aka Dictator) then all would be WONDERFUL...

This thinking that BO is so smart that we must do whatever he says is such garbage and entirely un-American. BO is a fool...a Marxist fool.

But regarding invoking the 14th, I hope he does it. Because it will prove his dictatorial tendencies and further deteriorate his standing with the American people.

As the Great One said...and it really is 100% applicable to BO...

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so."

 

[Openmind]

Yeah...BO is the smartest man in the world. If only he could be our Dear Leader (aka Dictator) then all would be WONDERFUL...

This thinking that BO is so smart that we must do whatever he says is such garbage and entirely un-American. BO is a fool...a Marxist fool.

But regarding invoking the 14th, I hope he does it. Because it will prove his dictatorial tendencies and further deteriorate his standing with the American people.

As the Great One said...and it really is 100% applicable to BO...

Very mature post! How do you manage?

 

[ThisTooShallPass]

My Republican Representative is a first termer. He is a TEA Partier. He "explained" to me that there is no reason to raise the debt ceiling; we will just live within our means from now on.

Afterwards a friend laughed and said "I see you've met our bankrupt rodeo clown." I said "Huh?" and my friend replied "Yeah. his next to last job before being elected to Congress was as a rodeo clown. And before that he couldn't pay his bills and he went bankrupt."

I only mention this because it is has become clear that the TEA Partiers are inexperienced and have not done their homework. They are determined to destroy the economy just so Barack Obama takes a hit.

My own reaction is that President Obama needs to use the 14th Amendment, announce the crisis is over, and let us move on. Some one wants to sue him, fine.

Let me refresh everyone's memory of what Section 4 of the 14th Amendment actually says.

"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void."

Can there be any doubt but what the President is in fact obligated to pay our bills as they come due?

If we are indeed spending more than we take in, then let the House do their job, and fix it.

Terrible idea.

Yes, there is a Constitutional obligation to honor the debt authorized by law -- i.e., to acknowledge it as legitimately the government's debt. It does not imply an obligation to repay it at all (i.e., Congress could by law repudiate the debt), much less to repay it on time.

Even if it did imply such an obligation, it would not justify disregarding the debt ceiling -- the vast majority of our current spending is for non-debt related expenditures, and the portion accounted for by debt service is relatively small. Thus even if we hit the debt ceiling we can continue to make debt service payments.

And even if it were the case that the Constution requires that the debt be repaid (and it doesn't), there is also a Constitutional requirement that the President obey the law, not arbitrarily and without court injunction disregard the ones he doesn't like. Suppose Congress passes and he signs a $10 trillion budget, only to find the bond markets won't play along. Does this excuse him from every possible law that would forbid him from raising $10 trillion in revenues? That would be absurd.

If Obama did this, it would be a recipe for legal and constitutional crisis. It would tank his Presidency. If nothing else, as has already been said, it would be an impeachable offense. And all so what, a few hundred thousand federal employees can keep drawing paychecks? So we can deny, for a few more weeks, the fact that the economy sucks and that it's been levitating for years on economic bubbles and, most recently, deficit spending?

Not to mention, the big worry here is not hitting the debt ceiling (again, we can in fact afford to live within our means -- our tax revenue is sufficient to make most entitlement payments and all of our debt service payments) but failing to lower our debt-to-GDP ratio. Actually even that's not necessary; S&P has said all that's necessary to avoid a downgrade is a mere $400 billion cut in deficit spending, and we can't even agree to that.

 

[Dr.Who]

"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void."

As is usually the case the Constitution RESTRICTS what the gov can do.

In this case the amendment says that the gov cannot question the validity of the debt and cannot pay for debts incurred by rebels.

The 14th does not give Obama a power that he can invoke. It restricts what he can do.

 

[ProudLefty]

As is usually the case the Constitution RESTRICTS what the gov can do.

In this case the amendment says that the gov cannot question the validity of the debt and cannot pay for debts incurred by rebels.

The 14th does not give Obama a power that he can invoke. It restricts what he can do.

There is a lot of interpretation involved. Lawyers will argue either side of that case (No surprise there, eh! )


However in reading the article, I see no way that the government or any part of it can just decide unilaterally decide to not pay our debts on time and in full. I would think that any President who did not pay the debts made by the US Congress would be very likely to be impeached and found guilty.

Carrying the argument to an extreme, just to gain some clarity, If the US Congress votes to spend a billion dollars on building a grand museum in Kansas dedicated to the wonders of guano, and the President decided on his own to just not do it, then wouldn't the President be in danger of impeachment?

Or, lets say that there really isn't enough money, and either checks bounce or we don't pay 40% of our obligations. Who gets to decide which 40% gets shut out? What would there be to stop the President from saying "OK, any money going to zip codes in the districts of Republican Congressmen gets marked "Hold" and we pay everyone else. Any money left over, if any, gets doled out to Republican districts later on."

How would you react if that scenario was laid on you?

 

[Dr.Who]

Or, lets say that there really isn't enough money, and either checks bounce or we don't pay 40% of our obligations. Who gets to decide which 40% gets shut out? What would there be to stop the President from saying "OK, any money going to zip codes in the districts of Republican Congressmen gets marked "Hold" and we pay everyone else. Any money left over, if any, gets doled out to Republican districts later on."

How would you react if that scenario was laid on you?

My understanding is that it is the treasury that decided in what order to pay the bills, with input from the president.

If it were me I would have to pay all bills that were mandated and I would not pay those that were not mandated, based on which ones were least consistent with our constitution. I would not pay them based on who could do favors for me - which is no doubt why I would never be elected President to begin with.

Since there is enough money to pay all the bills that are mandated and then some there would only be political hell to pay and not any real hell.