The 14th Amendment Coup d’Etat
In your face, Tea Partiers!
Left-wing pundits like Keith Olbermann (Current TV), Lawrence O’Donnell (MSNBC), and Katrina vanden Heuvel (Washington Post) practically drool at the recent claim that President Obama can unilaterally declare the debt-ceiling law unconstitutional, break off negotiations with Republicans, and order the Treasury secretary to borrow hundreds of billions of dollars without consulting Congress.
O’Donnell revels in the Eureka! moment as he realizes Obama doesn’t need to negotiate with stubborn Republicans, he can just dictate terms thanks to this “nuclear option.” Vanden Heuvel thinks the president should threaten to deploy it ASAP, “as a last resort,” to save those who have become dependent upon government for their comfort and care.
What has these leftists all atwitter? Believe it or not, it’s a novel application of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would make President Obama commander in chief of the economy as well as the military. Olbermann loves the “charm” of “stealing the Tea Party’s act” and turning their darling Constitution into their enemy.
Under the 14th-Amendment scenario, the president could tell the House speaker: “Take a hike, Boehner. I’m not cutting a penny of federal spending.” Then he’d whip out the national credit card and run up our balance beyond the current $14.5 trillion. Meanwhile, Speaker Boehner would sit hangdog helpless in his office, gaze despondently at his gloomy poll numbers, and plan a lot more fishing trips with his grandchildren in 2013 when Obama is re-inaugurated, and Boehner is retired.
The Genesis of Pleading the 14th
The idea for the allegedly constitutional ploy appeared first on April 28, in a faux speech in The Atlantic, penned for the president by one Garrett Epps, author of a 2007 book on the 14th Amendment. Epps teaches “creative writing for law students” at the University of Baltimore, and apparently practices what he teaches.
Coincidentally, the very next day Bruce Bartlett’s column in the Fiscal Times appeared, advancing the same concept. These two apparently unconnected men sowed the seeds of this blooming progressive meme. By May, no less a figure than Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner pulled out a pocket Constitution during a Politico-sponsored panel discussion, and read aloud a single sentence from the amendment.
“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.”
Geither actually paused before the final phrase, and said, “This is the important thing…shall not be questioned.” Over the past two months, “14th Amendment” has become a veritable battle cry among those seeking to maintain the tax-borrow-and-spend status quo.
Let’s take a brief look at the foundations of this revolutionary notion, evaluate its validity, and examine its implications.
Garrett Epps, in his fantasy presidential address, accurately points out that the 14th Amendment was framed to prevent Southerners (read Democrats) from grabbing a congressional majority, then using it either to force the federal government to pay off Confederate debt and compensate former owners of emancipated slaves for their losses, or to refuse to pay off obligations that the U.S. government had racked up in pay and pensions for Union soldiers. The amendment would prevent a sour-grapes faction from wrecking the credit of the reunified nation. Thus far, all sensible readers agree.
The pretend speechwriter then imagines his boss saying:
The national debt must be paid in full, on time, regardless of any political division within our Congress. That is what the Framers intended: to set the debt obligations of our country beyond the reach of Congressional meddling. Those obligations will not be questioned as long as I am president of the United States.
However, should the president ever decide to speak such words in public, it would constitute another “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States of America — a 14th-Amendment coup d’etat. As of this writing, the White House has refused to comment on the concept, insisting there’s no “Plan B” if talks with Republicans fail.
“… a broad reading” Riiiight. We’ll just pretend it means something else.
“You know, if you hold it at arm’s length, turn it slightly sideways, close one eye, and put it between you and the Sun, it actually kinda looks like it says something else.”
Everything you need to know about the Left is shown in those few words, “a broad reading”. It’s the same with “a living Constitution”. They are words used to justify throwing off the chains of the Constitution, to escape its limitations through legalistic chicanery.
Everything they want is foiled by the high walls of the Constitution. They never seek to amend the Constitution, because they know folks would never go along with what they actually want, so they resort to weaselly words. Are there any influential Democrats who are not also lawyers? Any at all?
“A broad reading”… meaning, “not an exact reading”.
Marc… I believe folks are trying to over intellectualize what they believe is law or what the constitution reads. For example from Mr Otts article…["...claim that President Obama can unilaterally declare the debt-ceiling law unconstitutional..."]
Well, there is NO such thing as a binding congressional CAP mechanism by law or in the constitution. I would invite all to read the Congressional Budget, Performance and Program Analysis Handbook. Its the Congressional process Bible! One thing you will note in section after section is this…["The process is centered around a concurrent resolution on the Budget which sets aggregate budget policies and functional priorities. Because it is not a law, the budget resolution [CAPS] does not have statutory effect; no money can be raised or spent pursuant to a budget resolution. The main purpose of the annual budget resolution is to establish the framework within which the Congress considers separate revenue, spending, and other budget-related activities.”]
The populist rhetoric on this topic is misguided and probably intentionally so. The President nor through his Secretary of Treasure are they asserting any authority to circumvent legislative spending appropriations. What they are speaking to, is the Treasury paying the bills as directed by legislative appropriation and the constitutions mandate for the Treasury to pay those obligations though they may exceed, do to any number of circumstances, the amount of the legislated national budget.
In current circumstances, the national budget obligations sent to the Treasury exceeds the governments revenues thus, to pay the bills the Treasury will need to do one of two things….print more money or borrow (oxymoron) from other sources what is needed. In either case, additional spending and debt are incurred to meet the congressional appropriated budget obligations and for the Treasury to meet its constitutional mandate to pay that spending and any incurred debt. Again, the spending and debt obligations are mandated upon the Treasury by law and the constitution.
The Treasury refusing to meet their constitutional payment obligations would be the greater and relevant matter for discussion. Surely, some folks have noted that the congress, as a convened official body, has remained totally moot on this populist discussion. They know the facts of law and the constitution as they pertain to the Treasury paying the bills even in the face of increased spending above the ‘appropriated’ budget and raising the national debt. Congressional appropriations and the constitution, extends to the Treasury the means to appropriate funds to pay the bills even in the face of revenue shortfalls. Likewise, it is the responsibility of congress to levy taxes (the only constitutional means) in an appropriate amount to maintain payment for its authorized spending and incurred debt.
The CAPS and treasury discussion is nothing more than a circus sideshow! Congress, not the president nor the treasury or the constitution is the problem here! Time to redirect the finger pointing and discussions where it duly belongs….on congress!
If Obama usurps the power of the purse from the House, and the Republicans allow it, our Republic is finished. Congress will be nothing but an expensive, useless appendage of our government.
Welcome to Imperial America. Just like the Romans, we will have a fake Senate with Senators for life. Just like the Roman Empire, we will gradually tax and oppress the middle class into serfdom. And when it fails, a new Dark Age will ensue.
Old soldiers comment is even more ominous than it looks for the other ingredient needed for the fall of Rome, the Barbarians at the gate, is already in the mix.
the only, yet game changing, difference is an armed citizenry
The original Roman yeomen farmers (the middle class) were all armed (albeit with weapons that required physical strength and worked better in teams). All male citizens were required to serve in the Legions.
They gave it all up for bread and circuses.
i know most of the old republic’s male citizens served in the legions and were probably armed with a gladius and scutum to defend their lands but wasn’t it traditionally appropriate for a returning army to disband and disarm before crossing the rubicon? (and i’m pretty sure there was nothing like our constitution/dec of independence in the roman republic that mandated the citizenry remove a despotic tyrant by force of arms if necessary)
i do see your point and i agree we, as a country, are walking a fine line but we all haven’t crossed the rubicon yet
rome does provide the historical footnote of the fork in the path that lay right in front of us
Exactly. It’s hard to make a Stalinist omelet with an armed populace.
The more common state of human organization is that of people governed by a King, Chief or a Dictator surrounded by Lords, Dukes, Grand Vizers, Grasping Throngs, Loyal Patronage Seeking Commrades, etc. Republics are few and far between. Democracies always fail. Meritocracy is an invention of the human intellect, nepotism is the normal state of affairs in Human Nature.
In the last days of the Elite and Arrogant Senate of the Last Republic of Rome as they gathered for their final sessions, they were, unknown to themselves, willing dupes waiting for the soon to be Dictator Julius Cesaer to make his move. He knowing full well they could do nothing.
Or more aptly put to our situation:
A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
And where exactly were all the patriots when President Nixon and friends converted the USD from a Gold Backed hard asset Currency, into Fiat worthless paper ?? We are in this mess because of those actions.
The damage wrought from the actions of President Nixon and his cohorts in Crime benefited only one group; Bankers and their interests. Unless and until people stop the political nonsense and follow the money, nothing will change. The costs just get higher, the profits larger and larger for the banking system.
…leave it to a dumb-ass democrat. We’re wide awake here, and the people on this board rail against people like Nixon and Bush. So what the hell is your problem still defending the idiot marxist in chief?
I’m with IDSA! I absolutely DETEST people who point out bad behavior to excuse other bad behavior!
I was 5. The older ones were probably in Vietnam trying save a win while Nixon and the Democrats were busy giving it away in Paris and with budget cuts.
In my lifetime there has only been one President worth a damn.
Listen to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) who clerked for Alito when he was on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals: it’s flatly unconstitutional.
I think a move by the regime to break the debt limit would have a serious Bill of Impeachment in the House within 24 hours. It would surely pass the House, though in the Senate, it would not, there would not be the kind of popular “it’s only about sex” sympathy Clinton got. Oh, Bambi would claim it was to ‘pay widows and orphans and defense’ but I don’t think that would fly in the face of the stimulus.
Fat chance of any bill of impeachment, ever! This President has violated the Constitutional limits on his authority more often and more blatantly than any other before .. well, may Jackson was worse; I’d have to look it up .. than any other in recent history. Did you see any bills of impeachment when he twisted the Federal bankruptcy laws to the benefit of his political allies? How about when his Attorney General permitted the Voting Rights chief to direct only lawsuits to enforce the voting rights of blacks? Any bills voted out when .. to skip ahead and ignore perhaps a dozen more for space considerations .. he declared war on Lybia and ordered the armed forces to attack that country because he liked the rebel side in that civil war? No? Then what in the name of the Whiskey Rebellion makes you think that the bunch of castrattii in the House are going to pass a bill of impeachment about this??
What is happening to this country? Have we lost our minds? We have lost good people defending this country against those who want to cram socialistic/communist ideologies but for some reason they want to force this experiment down the throats of Americans. for having gone to college many of them did not learn a thing Look at all the countries where it has failed. It will never work and sooner or later these governments have fallen apart but these arrogant idiots, the president included, are trying to make it work. I guess they’ll be happy when the USA turns it’s name into USSR!
It’s not about whether socialism/communism will work, its about the total, unending power of the ruling class.
The fact is Republicans LOVE socialism just as much as the Democrats. It’s all a matter of perspective and priorities. For Republicans giving generous taxpayer funded welfare handouts to big oil, Wall Street, etc. is just good business, but helping an unemployed dad put food on the table for his family is socialism. It’s just a matter of word play. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats are the constituencies that the socialism benefits.
If I paint the 14th Amendment with an even broader brush, I could declare Congress and the President inept and take over in some coup d’etat. Of course that Brush would have to totally obscure the limits set on the Government by the rest of the Constitution, but the Libs don’t really seem to even take that document into consideration any more.
There are things that, once done, that are very hard to undo. Not impossible, but it can be done. It all depends on the will of the people.
Sure, Obama could try to raise the debt limit on his own…and then he’d be impeached by Congress the very next day. And trust me, a lot of Democrats would vote against him. If he did that, then there would be no need for Congress and Obama would pretty much be a dictator. I don’t even want to think of the social unrest it would cause in this nation. Nope, never going to happen. To people like Keith Olbermann, Lawrence O’Donnell, and Katrina vanden Heuvel it would be a wet dream come true, but it will NEVER happen. But keep dreaming, guys, it’s what you far-left liberals do best. That AND spend other people’s money.
Liberty….Nobody seems to focus on facts anymore. How many on this site support the Ryan Plan or any other GOP plans being loosely floated? There currently is not a plan out there that does not raise the debt levels over the next ten years even if it (they) work precisely as written or stated. All this populist rhetoric over capping the debt ceiling is just that…empty rhetoric!
The government simply has ongoing financial obligations at a time when it is broke and the economy is broken. The nations people, their government and economy is in a catch-22 situation. ANY real cut spending solutions involve significantly more lost jobs and the welfare of huge sectors of nations population.
The federal government drives a huge portion of the nations economy and jobs whether folks want to admit it or not or…maybe they simply don’t know it. For example, the 1700+ government subsidies to the private sector enterprises and municipal governments benefits employment by several means directly and indirectly…several millions of jobs in fact! Repealing any or all those subsidies will decrease economic productivity and increase unemployment. Thats just a sad fact and not a very pretty solution for the times! On the other hand, we have the social programs of government such as the absorbed private sector retirement and health care benefits that became insoluable, education benefits, Medicare and Medicaid and child health care….and of course, the more sustainable and independent social security program. What and who do you sacrifice in the numbers that are meaningful to solve the financial crunch? What happens to those caught up in those sacrifices? The nation hasn’t the benefit of jobs for everybody even in the best of economic conditions let alone forcing the aged and disabled to go back to work.
Finally! The days of sustainable low unemployment in America are history. The economy is now a competitive global one and one with essentially ‘economic and market’ equality among the developed nations of Europe and North America. China, India, South Korea, South America, Latin America, etc., leave The U.S. essentially non competitive. Furthermore, with uncontrolled immigration and birth rates, though low, the nation still cannot stay up with employment needed for its population….much less global competitiveness.
Theres three options! Try spending/investing our way out of this mess. Declaring bankruptcy on our cities, States and federal governments financial obligations…all ‘connected’ together. Sacrificing large portions of our nations population. Thats the reality facing folks! Proposals of nickle-diming is no solution and only gives way to a deeper grave at some point, probably sooner than later.
Hopefully, should the nation make it out of this mess by any of the real choices, later generations will be far more responsible by not go to sleep and wake up late in seeing their mistakes.
TT makes good points about the size and scope of gov spending. But he overlooks the “shared sacrifice clause” ie. why not cut spending 20% across the board? That would bring us back into solvency in a matter of a few years. Thus far the “belt tightening” has all been on the non government side. No Gov jobs need be cut just salaries and pensions reduced by 20%. That my friend is shared sacrifice. Congress could also declare a financial state of emergency and ground the jet- setter- and- chief. There is much that can be done that will inspire and improve taxpayer morale. How ’bout mean testing Congressional salaries. Why are the Pelosis, Clinton and Kerrys still sucking off the little people. Is not the power gratifying enough?
**There is still much that citizens can do to impose our will on a rogue government….Check out the 535Project & how to weaponize your vote to INSIST on a Cap, Cuts and a Balanced budget at http://www.libertysoup.org/Home.html
There is no ceiling on the measures Comrade Obamao would take to collapse our economy. Civic violence, martial law, suspended elections, Civil War–all in a day’s work.
The Presidency is a co-equal branch of government, entitled to interpret the Constitution as it sees fit, to declare unconstitutional laws passed by Congress and approved of by the courts, and to act independently unless restrained by impeachment. Obama is the first president brave and strong enough act fully Constitutional. No coup required. Obama, the Lightworker, uses his powers, unchecked by custom or tradition, unbound by Congressional and judicial fools.
Pray tell, what hard left school of thought mis-educated you?
C’mon ErisGuy, you forgot the sarcasm tags, didn’t you?
The mind is a terrible thing to waste.
That’s why we have three parts to the government in place. Only the Supreme Court can interpert the law, not some socialist group, or the loonies who were born with two left feet and half a brain.
No – the Supremes don’t interpret the law. They decide if LAWS are Constitutional or not. Period. The courts over time have grabbed entirely too much power. Decisions on abortion are clearly states rights issues and not even addressed (nor were they meant to be) by the Constitution.
This is too good! If it’s sarcasm then it’s fabulous. If ErisGuy is trying to be serious then it’s superb theater and certainly fits the intent of the quote “You just can’t make this stuff up!”
Housebreak your male bovine will ya? I hope you’re just joking. (But in case you aren’t, I have an armed militia to prevent Sir Home-boy from becoming the 2d dictator of the United States. (Lincoln was the 1st.)
It seems to be common thinking among the gaggle of liberal morons like O’Donnell, Olbermann, Maher etc. that the community organizer in chief should just seize power to do anything he likes in the name of managing the the ignorant rabble.
They’ll blithely latch on to some un-related line in the Constitution (first time they’ve read it) to back themselves up.
Ignoramuses.
On the recent history of the debt crisis itself, read this…
The Elmendorf Rule
Appropriate link of the day
How much more of this can our republic take? This is insane.
“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, . . . shall not be questioned.”
The existing debt ceiling is “authorized by law” and hence shall not be questioned.
A higher debt ceiling, as of yet, is not authorized by law, however, and Obama obviously does not have the authority to act on the assumption that it exists.
Why can’t these really “smart” people who work for MSNBC and the leftist think tanks figure this out?
Agreed. Contrary to Mr. Geithner, the important part of the 14th is the beginning, which states clearly that it is the debt authorized in accordance with law (by Congress) that shall not be questioned. Anything additional, is not debt, yet.
And Section 5 of the 14th Amendment re-affirms that Congress (and not the President) has the authority to take action:
“The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
Everything this regime and its supporters try to do can be understood if we acknowledge that their objective is to make as many people as possible either dependent on or subservient to government, thereby ensuring a permanent authoritarian state for the benefit of Leftists and their cronies…the Rule of Law be damned.
I don’t see what the big deal is. Politicians have already eviscerated the Constitution by using the commerce clause to invalidate pretty much all the rest of the Constitution. And the three words “Necessary and Proper” to ignore all the rest of the Constitution, even though the rest of the sentence is necessary and proper to execute laws within the framework of their enumerated powers.
If Obama can do this, he can unilaterally raise taxes, or even declare a wealth tax.
A. 14th amendment refers to existing debt not new ones
b. Article I section 9: No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in Consequence of appropriations made by law; etc Obama is tryng to trash the Constitution as he’s trying to trash the country but he still has a way to go.
If Reaganomics failed, it was because it was only partly correct. As Michelle Bachmann is finding out “the New Way Forward” is through von Mises and the Austrian School. The world is fully invested in Keynes and now his theory that we can print our way to prosperity is wearing very thin. All the Keynesian analysts are surprised at the current moribund job growth. von Mises told us long ago that expanding credit (whether by printing money or by buying home loans like Fannie did) only causes the “appearance of prosperity”, after which rational values will eventually exert themselves.
Further, Keynes never explains how an economy should function when everything is running smoothly. von Mises, in his wonderful book Human Action starts off by explaining that the free exchange is the ONLY form of economic interaction where all participants have an increase in wealth. When we allow government to intrude in free exchange, at least one of the parties has wealth diminished.
Human Action can be found at http://www.mises.org (free download of the PDF edition, the dead tree edition is for sale in paperback).
I can also recommend Rothbard’s Man, Economy and State, available there as well.
i agree; but i also believe the most important aspect/point of the “austrian method,” is not only the wealth creating potential of a free market based on voluntary cooperation but the realization that the greatest threat to individual liberty is the concentration of power– the concentration of government power is the worst of all– and the only system discovered by human beings that diffuses the concentration of power is a competitive free-market
it is through the vein of concentration of power that gives us the “in” to the rest of the methodology of capitalism
True that your constitution is in danger.But readers just talk.
Obama has already been enabled by our Congress to TRASH the Constitution at its worse possible offense. It is a FACT that he does not qualify to be President or Vice President of the United States because he fails to meet the requiremnet of the “NATURAL born citizen” clause of Article II, Section 1 of our Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled on the definition of “natural born citizen” and set a BINDING PRECEDENT in the Minor v Happersett case 88 U.S., 162, 167-68(1875). That case has never been overturned and is the law of the land. Congress has made at least 8 attempts since 2003 to circumvent the Amendment process to change that “natural born citizen” requirement. That tells me they ALL know what the Constitution requires and that should scare the pants off ALL Americans, especially those who contribute to Pajama Media. You have not written ONE article about this.
This has caused great problems for President Obama and that was on display when he was pressured by the polls, the release of Jerome Corsi’s book and Donald Trump to release ANOTHER Birth Certificate. This time the President owns the document he released on April 27th. That document has been inspected by nationally renowned and respected forensic document examiners and software experts and they have publically repudiated that computer-generated image as FRAUDULENT (a FORGERY). Major General Paul Vallely, a Fox News contributor stated that he had “ex-CIA and investigators look at Obama’s Birth Certificate, and 10 out of 10 said it was a FORGERY. Are you interested NOW?? Not a single reputable forensic document examiner or software expert will risk their reputation or career by authenticating that specious computer image. It is time to get to work Pajams Media and do something about this massive coverup.
Please don’t prevent this comment from being posted, Americans need to know what the hell is going on.
This argument is nonsense. The 14th Amendment is essentially the same as Sen. Pat Toomey’s proposed Full Faith and Credit Act: The President and the Treasury Secretary must use the available funds to pay principal and interest on the debt. Any other uses of funds are subordinated to debt service. Presumably, Social Security would be untouched as long as the trust funds last, but all other appropriations would be paid at the President’s discretion.
“And the wheels on the bus go round and round….” Autor: Richard Scarry
How many “Revolutions” do the wheels make?
The only one that has a hope of stopping America’s constitutional traitor is a cry baby and I think a turncoat to the conservative cause. If you expect tough things from boehner, forget it, you don’t play golf then stab the guy before the next round.
If Obama wishes to invoke the 14th amendment to hike the debt ceiling on his own he’d better consider some way of side-stepping the 12th amendment if he is going to stay in power after January 2013.
Scott,
excellent piece. Shared, or will be as soon as I hit the “submit comment” button.
“In a nutshell, the power of the purse, both to expend and replenish, whether by taxation or borrowing, belongs to Congress, not to the president.” – Yes, and there is a fear expressed by these posts that Obama is poised to usurp the Constitution once again; aided and abetted by both Reps and Dems. Obviously, the “appearance of power” is better than power itself, and Obama’s deceiving many. Remember “war is deceit”? Well, it looks a lot like the Republicans forgot that one!
This IS truly insane.
How the @#$% does equal protection under the law allow reckless debt spending?
This reading of the 14th Amendment is total nonsense but it does fit with the Obama stratagy of seeing what he can get away with by pushing beyound any previous limits of presidential power. Senator Rubio was correct, these are the actions of third world would-be dictator like Hugo Chavez. During the 2008 elections, some people asked about an Obama presidency, ‘How bad could he be?’. Well, here is your answere. The only thing saving us, so far, is that most people (save Nancy Pelosi, of course), even in the government, are vaguely aware that our Constitution requires some limits on their exersize of power. That and the fact that the Obami are just so unbelievable incompetent, even at subversion.
I would say like Clint Eastwood, “make my day”.
Obama is an illiterate in economics, but literate in electioneering. No, he would not try it.
What happened here is that a couple of the smartest people in the room glommed on to Section 4 of the 14th Amendment without understanding it. Geithner read it and ran his mouth before chatting with the Treasury General Counsel. I am sure that he was told that Section 4 is about the “Insurrection and Rebellion” by the Southern States and not a general statement on the public debt. These are the same “smart” people who think Sarah Palin is stupid. I am sure that Sarah would have quickly figured out that the debt provisions of the 14th are specific to the Civil War. Takes an Ivy Leaguer to so spectacularly misread the Constitution.
It should be noted that the 14th Amendment is NOT a “Framers” document. It does nothing to modify or change the real Framers Document aka The Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights with respect to Congress’s duties regarding US revenues and expenditures.
The year of enactment of the 14th was 1868, somewhat removed from the Constitutional Convention and enactment of the US Constitution.
That said, this Constitutional Scholar/Lawyer/POTUS continues to amaze regarding our Constitution. This Emperor (with or without clothes) seems to really believe that the US Constitution should mean what the Political Class feels/says it should mean on a day to day basis. Unfortunatly a sizeable chunk of the Judiciary seem to be of the same opinion.
It frankly blows the mind.
A lot of fighting talk…..
But that is all.
My bet is that a deal will be reached and the debt ceiling will be raised.
(In the MSM today: Republican US House Speaker John Boehner poured cold water Friday on talk of an “imminent deal” with the White House to raise the US debt limit, but warned of dire fallout unless one is reached soon.)
Obama (and his henchmen like Holder) has called his opponents bluff several times and they have faltered and retreated every time.
Rinos like Boehner will fold under the attack by the DemocRats and the MSM.
I wish I could disagree. It will be tax hikes in 2012 in exchange for promised spending cuts in 2020 that never materialize.
So where does it say concerning validity and not questioning that authority, is the part about vested in the Presidency?? In any case it clearly refers to the the Civil War, though the insurrection part may anticipatory, VERY.
In any case it seems Congress doesn’t exist, nor did a deliberative body exist for Stalin. I’m still intrigued by the “insurrection” part. A warning?
27. tdiinva – has it exactly right. Besides this latest incarnation of the living constitution emerging from some graveyard after midnight like a Romero ‘night of the living dead’ slasher flick, promoted by the likes of MSNBC hacks, the Treasury Secretary, who is supposed to be the smartest man on the planet next to THE ONE in the White House himself, insisted on presenting this giberish at what was supposed to otherwise be a serious venue for policy discussion.
Talk about desperate folks.
Its bad enough that the black congressional caucus has been trying to drag the Tea Party into ipso facto KKK affiliation ever since rising up against Obamacare – now the Treasury Secretary – the same genius who ran the NY Fed as primary qualification to be the Treasury Sec back in the bad ol’ financial meltdown days of Paulson and Bernanke – is conflating the aftermath of the Civil War with a recalcitrant Republican congress who are threating to call his bluff concerning the end of the financial world as we know it if HE DOESN’T GET HIS VISA/MC limit uppped!
That is absolutely pathetic.
AS an Arizonan I find this new-found enchantment with the 14th ammendment facinating for entirely different reasons, reasons completely unrelated to the debate over our debt and the congressional VS White House battle to reach a compromise on raising our ceiling there of.
These same mouth pieces for the professional left, often when appearing on O’donnell’s program to boot, have been wailing about the insanity of those on the right who question birth-right citizenship for illegals in regards to the established (not without debate mind you) reading of said 14th ammendment. And how said conservatives now questioning this interpretation – which was basically established in the early 20th century – over a time -decades in fact -when we as a country were likewise first establishing by law immigration restrictions – these same professional whinners claim such consevatives are both mad as hatters and racist as Lester Maddox for even daring to suggest a fresh revised legal challenge (something they support on the other side routinely).
Notice how the left never deals with the substance of the argument concerning reviewing the validity of the 14th ammendment to allow anchor babies (be they babies or post HS Grads demanding DREAM ACT amnesty) to service chain migration for tens of millions of presumably Democrat Party membership-in-waiting once they receive ‘family reunification’ amnesty.
It is ALWAYS ABOUT NAME-CALLING, never about the issues. Taking the position alone that the 14th ammendments intrepretation regarding immigration – in their view – AUTOMATICALLY ‘outs’ someone – anyone – as a racist anti-immigration nativist.
St. Lawrence O’donnell has run ENTIRE ONE HOUR PROGRAMS devoted to this false premise.
Scott Ott does a pretty succinct job of displaying just how the progressive professional left take the art of lawyerly lying to a crude folk art on MSNBC.
Dame Katrina is considered among her tribe to be one of the foremost EDITORS OF A GENERATION? Ok I guess. Unlike Megan McCain she didn’t have daddy fork out 100k plus to put BA COLUMBIA U next to her byline when blathering on TV.
No, these are highly educated people, who like the Treasury Secretary of the United States know they are full of shit when saying what they are saying. The full bloom elitist arrogance in close up on display; yes its a lie, but its a beautiful and useful lie.
Just as they know that the former Democratic House, under Pelosi, & in the Senate under Reid, when they went forward with Obama in the belief they had a veto proof congress, NEVER EVER PROVIDED A CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET – as was their sworn duty to do so. FOR TWO YEARS!
To many crises, too little time….couldn’t be bothered with PUTTING TOGETHER A BUDGET! Do not forget that the same liars who are trying to sell you another global crisis meltdown – unless they ‘get their ceiling’ PAID NO PENALTY (other than congressional losses) for never even presenting the American People with a budget. (And now they balk when Republican leadership walk away from the VP in a ‘negotiation’?)
Funny, they never quoted this interpretation of the 14th ammendment – not even on David Letterman. Lots about what a joke Palin is, but not a word about the cosntitution bypassing congressional budget – that ol’ ‘POWER OF THE PURSE’ was just another fantasy we got taught back in middle school – before progressives came along and invented a newer improved more ‘perfect union.’
It is a pathetic and desperate attempt to sway the public. It didn’t work in the ’10 mid-terms – and it ain’t gonna work now. Or in 2012.
Excellent post Scott Ott.
Like the Serpent in the Garden, Obama and his cohorts are experts at perverting the truth into a lie that can lead people astray.
So by declaring this law unconstitutional, he dismisses both the Legislative and the Judicial branches of the Government. It has always been my understanding that only the Supreme Court can rule any law unconstitutional and only the House can originate spending bills. No individual has the power to do this in our present political system.
Jay Leno had it right when , during the Iraqi constitutional debates, ‘Lets send them ours, we aren’t using it’
Very GOOD Scott. You did your homework! Thanks for letting me cheat off your paper. twitter.com/ggallman
I strongly suggest, as a WW2 veteran (there aren’t many of us left!!) that we
put aside the verbiage (hope that’s a word) and our plows and take up arms in
readiness for another assault on our constitution. If Congress and the
Supreme Court can’t stop the ruination of our country, isn’t it time the people
take charge? God Bless the USA !!!
That reads like it was written in a hurry and not subjected to criticism based on how it can be mis-interpreted. (Oh, for a time machine to deliver someone a smack alongside the head.)
I kept thinking of the 2nd while reading the proposal. Blast the founders for mentioning the militia.
Another interesting little part of the 14th Amendment is Section 5, known as its “Enforcement Clause.” It states: “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” Now, I am no big time thinker like Keith Olbermann, but Section 5 does not appear to give unilateral authority to the President. But hey, what do I know, I’m just interpreting the actual text of the Amendment.
Just a couple of points.
The federal government nor its three branches can spend a dime that is not first authorized by the congress.
When the congress authorizes any spending or borrowing, it also ‘directs’ the tressury of the [Executive Branch] to pay those obligations…a legally and constitutional bound direction to the Executive Branch and its Treasury Department by law from the congress.
Now comes all the populist controversay over whether the President..the constitutional overseerer of the Exectutive Branch and it many departments, agencies and corporations has the authority to direct the Treasury to pay the congressionally authorized payments and accumulated debt….in spite of some [non binding] congressional cap.
I would think that any modestly educated or common sense person could discern the answers surrounding this question. The congress ‘directed’ the Treasury of the Executive Branch, according to its constitutional mandate, in each piece of spending and borrowing legislation…to pay the incurred obligations. Short of the congress repealing its legislation and incurred debt to be paid by the Treasury, the Treasury Department of the Executive Branch is constitutionally duty bound to pay any debts authorized and incurred by congress.
“Because it [Concurrent Resolution/discretionary spending budget cap] is not a law, the budget resolution does not have statutory effect; no money can be raised or spent pursuant to a budget resolution. The main purpose of the annual budget resolution is to establish the framework within which Congress considers separate revenue, spending, and other budget-related activities.”
Pretty simple I would say! Budget caps have NO standing in law or the constitution.
At the same time, Congress and the Treasury are obligated to maintain the functionality of the government meaning that 1) the Treasury will borrow more money to pay the authorized bills or 2) the Congress, will by necessity, have to repeal the legislation authorizing the spending and or debt being incurred through a lack of appropriate revenues. Standing spending/debt instruments (legislation) regardless of whether or not they may be incurring additional debt MUST be payed by the Treasury on the grounds of standing law and above all the mandates of the Constitution! Of course, the Treasury Department can default on the national debt as another option by refusing to print or borrow money funds, throwing the entire mess back on congress with potentially dire consequences.
All the populist “cap” rhetoric is silliness! There is NO such thing as a binding caps and….. the Treasury is obligated under law and the constitution to pay the durn bills incurred by congressional legislated spending…. even in the face of revenue shortfalls!
T.T.,
In your opinion, can the president and his party block spending cuts, and then order the Treasury Secretary to borrow more money without Congressional authorization? I’m struggling to understand your point.
Live the Freedom,
Scott
Scott… I never inferred any such thing by any stretch of imagination! We both know what veto powers the president has and doesn’t have so let’s get beyond that one.
Cutting to the chase! The congress and the Treasury have NO lawful constitutional options but to continue appropriations for spending and increasing the debt and interest and or raise taxes! All this CAPS debate and the President are irrelevant! If the government doesn’t have the revenue capability to pay its obligations they MUST raise taxes and or borrow it. There are NO constitutional options for bankruptcy…though I suppose they could try it in a moment of insanity. The Fed Reserve and other lending sources will continue bailing the congress and the government out by lending more money to the Treasury.
I would suggest you research what lawful and constitutional effect an ‘appropriations’ bill carries with it….in regards to the Treasury Department of the Executive Branch. It is that bill which includes the ‘directive’ for the Treasury to pay whatever is appropriated, within the confines of the legislative budget bill. Both the legislative and appropriations bills having been passed by congress meets the validity and constitutionality tests. The Treasury is now ‘mandated’ to pay those incurred spending/debt instruments.
1. All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may….
2. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts.
3. To borrow money on the credit of the United States.
4. Amendment 14.4 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.
Okay! There’s the extent of the ‘Congressional’ Constitutional authorities concerning debt. FIRST, note there are NO provisions for CAPS as it is the duty of congress to be responsible for and duly authorize spending and debt as it sees fit. SECOND, note that the founders gave only congress the powers to levy Taxes, Duties, Imposts to pay for the governments bills by the Treasury. THIRD, note that the founders obviously knew that at times the congress would need the authority to borrow monies on behalf of the United States and granted to them such powers.
Now, we both know how it’s supposed to work and the Treasury is mandated to pay all such authorized and valid debts. However, we know that in reality that is NOT the way it works. We know that the ever expanding roles of the Federal Reserve include aside from printing monies, they operating the nation’s payments system in addition to a role of strengthening the U.S. standing in the world economy….with the latter, a subject unto itself in the governments current situation of spiraling debt/interest and inflation. The Federal Reserve Bank is where the Treasury Department on behalf of the United States does its banking business for revenues coming in and payments going out and where much of the national debt is carried. It is essentially to the Federal Reserve that the congress must answer to for the debt carried and payments on behalf of the debt .
But let’s get back to the meat and potatoes. Congress is in a catch-22! Until, it repeals some percentage of its own legislative spending obligations, it has NO options but to continue spending for its current debt obligations and those forthcoming to maintain the government’s costs. That will be another year and a half in the making due to the upcoming election cycle. In the meantime, (16 months) the spending, debt and interest on the debt will continue to spiral far beyond any spending cut numbers they’re playing with now. A constitutional amendment for balanced budgets will not come before three to five years if even initiated. Keep in mind that at least 40% of the governments operating spending is nowhere near the proposed cut numbers so, the debt will continue to increase….even if there are no disasters looming in the near future.
["Keep in mind that at least 40% of the governments operating spending is nowhere near the proposed cut numbers so, the debt will continue to increase..."]
Should read:
Keep in mind that at least 40% of the governments operating spending [on the descretionary side is borrowed and] is nowhere near the proposed cut numbers so, the debt will continue to increase….
As far as the President is concerned, the United States Constitution is an archaic, unrealistic document, not to be an interference to his ego.