Constitution Compels Obama To Bypass Congress And Raise Debt Ceiling Unilaterally

[Wehrwolfen]

Dem Sen. Tom Udall: Constitution Compels Obama To Bypass Congress And Raise Debt Ceiling Unilaterally…​

Whose constitution? — North Korea’s?


continue reading -->
Democrats to Obama: Keep Constitution on the table in debt ceiling fight - Rachael Bade and Patrick Reis - POLITICO.com

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Try reading ours.

 

[Clementine]

An amendment says that public debt should not be questioned, which libs take to mean that they can spend on anything and no one can argue. They also take it to mean that the out of control spending on useless programs, aid to hostile countries and welfare benefits for illegals cannot be questioned and that the debt ceiling must be raised to cover the costs of their hair brained ideas. The will of the people and the decisions by duly elected representatives don't mean shit.

The amendment was made at a time when elected officials actually read bills and didn't pile pork into them before passing them. Back in the days where thought and due process were behind legislation, so there was no need to question the debt it incurred. Now, it's different, with so many things secretly passed. The actions of congress and the president should always be questioned considering how they keep information from the public as they carry out their agenda. The constitution does not give government carte blanche to do as they please without transparency. They need to be reeled in and reminded that they are public servants and not dictators who answer to no one. They forgot their place and too many people with their hands out could care less how bankrupt the country is because of entitlement mentality and foolish spending.

 

[OKTexas]

Try reading ours.

No where does it give the president that kind of authority. The 16.4 trillion we have legitimately racked up will be paid, the question is authorizing more debt. Only congress can make that decision. If they refuse the government will be forced to live with the revenues that are coming in, which would mean cutting about 40% of current expenditures.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Let him try. It will go to Court and he will lose. Only Congress can authorize spending. Not the President. Since we haven't had a budget in 4 years he can not even use that to claim he has authority.

 

[AmyNation]

The debt ceiling doesn't authorize spending.

 

[OKTexas]

The debt ceiling doesn't authorize spending.

Nope, it authorizes borrowing.

 

[AmyNation]

The debt ceiling doesn't authorize spending.

Nope, it authorizes borrowing.

To pay for all that spending that congress has already authorized.


Now, I'm not saying the president has the authority to bypass congress to raise the debt ceiling, just that raising it has nothing to do with authorizing spending.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The debt ceiling doesn't authorize spending.

Nope, it authorizes borrowing.

To pay for all that spending that congress has already authorized.


Now, I'm not saying the president has the authority to bypass congress to raise the debt ceiling, just that raising it has nothing to do with authorizing spending.

Reread the Constitution. Only Congress has the authority to BORROW. Shall I go find it for you?

 

[AmyNation]

Nope, it authorizes borrowing.

To pay for all that spending that congress has already authorized.


Now, I'm not saying the president has the authority to bypass congress to raise the debt ceiling, just that raising it has nothing to do with authorizing spending.

Reread the Constitution. Only Congress has the authority to BORROW. Shall I go find it for you?

 

[OKTexas]

The debt ceiling doesn't authorize spending.

Nope, it authorizes borrowing.

To pay for all that spending that congress has already authorized.


Now, I'm not saying the president has the authority to bypass congress to raise the debt ceiling, just that raising it has nothing to do with authorizing spending.

Unless they decide different, then major cuts will be required. I can authorize you to spend a million dollars but if you don't have the money and can't borrow it, what is the authorization really worth. That's why debt increases should be tied directly to the budget, if they budget a deficit, they should authorize the borrowing at the same time. You can't do that when your working in an emergency situation all the time, so it's time to slow down legislations and do thing in regular order, the way it is intended to be done.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

To pay for all that spending that congress has already authorized.


Now, I'm not saying the president has the authority to bypass congress to raise the debt ceiling, just that raising it has nothing to do with authorizing spending.

Reread the Constitution. Only Congress has the authority to BORROW. Shall I go find it for you?

Article I section 8

To borrow money on the credit of the United States

Article I | U.S. Constitution | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[AmyNation]

I think it would be detrimental to Obama to attempt to use the 14th to bypass congress. It will of course end up in the SC, and could very well lead to his impeachment, depending on their interpretation.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I think it would be detrimental to Obama to attempt to use the 14th to bypass congress. It will of course end up in the SC, and could very well lead to his impeachment, depending on their interpretation.

The debt discussed in the 14th is Civil War debt. It is not a discussion of debt in general and does not modify Article I Section 8.

Shall I quote the 14th for you too?

 

[Staidhup]

Its rather clear that the house of representatives has sole discretion as it regards spending and appropriations. The chief executive can or cannot propose a budget, the primary body empowered with budgetary responsibilities is the house. The president is not authorized to raise the debt ceiling without house authorization.
Now, I may be mistaken, please show me where it is written that the balance of powers and budgetary authority also rests in the hands of the president.

 

[freedombecki]

Dem Sen. Tom Udall: Constitution Compels Obama To Bypass Congress And Raise Debt Ceiling Unilaterally…​

Whose constitution? — North Korea’s?


continue reading -->
Democrats to Obama: Keep Constitution on the table in debt ceiling fight - Rachael Bade and Patrick Reis - POLITICO.com

Thank you for an interesting read, Wehrwolfen.

Nancy Pelosi said if she were president she would use the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling without Congress, but that she is not president. That makes me wonder which of her supporters or relatives needs another 1.3 billion dollars for some bankrupt green business that we taxpayers get stuck 100"% for!

She thinks all American paychecks and estates are her oyster, and she's going for the gusto.

Her lying obfuscations give me the creeps, like the 2700-page "affordable" Care Act she told people to just pass, so they will find out what it says. When they found out what it said, they couldn't believe it, but the Supreme Court was tapped and told them it was a tax. Now, we find out they will add 20 new taxes associated with the bill to each and every taxpayer.

I can't believe she omitted telling the public she intended to raise taxes on all Americans. She lied by omission of the most important fact of all--how bloody much it is going to cost each American to pay for everybody else's health care, no exceptions.

With all that money, she can target more hidden funds for her family.

What a cheatin' prima donna on your tax money is former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

14th Amendment section 4

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.

the amendment title even states Civil War debt.

Amendment XIV [Privileges and Immunities, Due Process, Equal Protection, Apportionment of Representatives, Civil War Disqualification and Debt (1868)] (see annotations)

14th Amendment | U.S. Constitution | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[AmyNation]

I think it would be detrimental to Obama to attempt to use the 14th to bypass congress. It will of course end up in the SC, and could very well lead to his impeachment, depending on their interpretation.

The debt discussed in the 14th is Civil War debt. It is not a discussion of debt in general and does not modify Article I Section 8.

Shall I quote the 14th for you too?

I can tell you see this purely in a black and white sense.

Can Obama Extend the Debt Ceiling on His Own? by Ronald Dworkin | NYRblog | The New York Review of Books

"The “debt shall not be questioned” clause was added to the Fourteenth Amendment for a specific and immediate purpose: to prevent the new Southern members of Congress, should they gain a majority, from cancelling the debt the Union had incurred in the war. But constitutional interpretation is not a catalogue of historical anecdotes; it is a matter of principle and we are therefore required to identify the principle on which the authors of the clause had to rely. As Chief Justice Hughes said of the clause in 1935, speaking for a unanimous Supreme Court, “While this provision was undoubtedly inspired by the desire to put beyond question the obligations of the government issued during the Civil War, its language indicates a broader connotation. We regard it as confirmatory of a fundamental principle … ”

The general contours of that fundamental principle seem clear enough. Congress does not have authority, even by a substantial majority, to dishonor the nation by repudiating outstanding debts it has authorized the nation to incur. The fiscal integrity of the United States is sacred and requires constitutional protection.

However, it's grey enough that constitutional scholars, which I am not, are debating it. The only way the question could truly be answered would be for Obama to try it, and for it to go to the SC.

 

[The Rabbi]

The amazing thing is that the Democraps have so little knowledge of the COnstitution, and so little respect for it, that they can be in favor of something like this. Mo Udall is turning in his grave.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think it would be detrimental to Obama to attempt to use the 14th to bypass congress. It will of course end up in the SC, and could very well lead to his impeachment, depending on their interpretation.

The debt discussed in the 14th is Civil War debt. It is not a discussion of debt in general and does not modify Article I Section 8.

Shall I quote the 14th for you too?

I can tell you see this purely in a black and white sense.

Can Obama Extend the Debt Ceiling on His Own? by Ronald Dworkin | NYRblog | The New York Review of Books

"The “debt shall not be questioned” clause was added to the Fourteenth Amendment for a specific and immediate purpose: to prevent the new Southern members of Congress, should they gain a majority, from cancelling the debt the Union had incurred in the war. But constitutional interpretation is not a catalogue of historical anecdotes; it is a matter of principle and we are therefore required to identify the principle on which the authors of the clause had to rely. As Chief Justice Hughes said of the clause in 1935, speaking for a unanimous Supreme Court, “While this provision was undoubtedly inspired by the desire to put beyond question the obligations of the government issued during the Civil War, its language indicates a broader connotation. We regard it as confirmatory of a fundamental principle … ”

The general contours of that fundamental principle seem clear enough. Congress does not have authority, even by a substantial majority, to dishonor the nation by repudiating outstanding debts it has authorized the nation to incur. The fiscal integrity of the United States is sacred and requires constitutional protection.

However, it's grey enough that constitutional scholars, which I am not, are debating it. The only way the question could truly be answered would be for Obama to try it, and for it to go to the SC.

There is nothing gray about it. The House has the sole power of the purse. The President cannot borrow money. He cannot authorize borrowing money. If they try this we are headed to a dictatorship.