Excellent discussion on US President raising the debt ceiling unilaterally...

[Guest032516]

It looks like POTUS can do it - at least under the 14th Amendment. The arguments against it are political, not legal.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...ic_if_the.html

Here is another article:

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/commen...talk_hertzberg

It was the Republican Party that ensure that the federal debt could not even by questioned, let alone repudiated.

The measure was designed to prevent newly re-admitted Congressmen from the Confederacy from playing mischief with government debt to get revenge - such as refusing to pay Union veteran benefits or paying off Confederate debts.

There is also the issue of who has standing to sue:

-----------------------------------------
"In the end, Obama could have no honorable choice but to invoke the Fourteenth. There is little doubt that he would prevail. The Supreme Court would be unlikely even to consider the matter, since no one would have standing to bring a successful suit: when the government pays its bills, who is damaged? The House Republicans might draw up articles of impeachment, adopt them, and send them to the Senate, where the probability of a conviction would be zero."
-----------------------------------------

We live in interesting times.

[nwarounder]

I hope he does! Will just add to the legacy...

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

I hope he does! Will just add to the legacy...

In what way?

[gnadfly]

No. Iv'e seen both R and D rebuttals to this. Obama would have done it 6 month or so ago when it was first brought up.

...From the same people who wanted Obama to grab all the AR-15s.

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

In what way?

Unilateral "decision making"

[Stan.Dupp]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

It looks like POTUS can do it - at least under the 14th Amendment. The arguments against it are political, not legal.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...ic_if_the.html

Here is another article:

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/commen...talk_hertzberg

It was the Republican Party that ensure that the federal debt could not even by questioned, let alone repudiated.

The measure was designed to prevent newly re-admitted Congressmen from the Confederacy from playing mischief with government debt to get revenge - such as refusing to pay Union veteran benefits or paying off Confederate debts.

There is also the issue of who has standing to sue:

-----------------------------------------
"In the end, Obama could have no honorable choice but to invoke the Fourteenth. There is little doubt that he would prevail. The Supreme Court would be unlikely even to consider the matter, since no one would have standing to bring a successful suit: when the government pays its bills, who is damaged? The House Republicans might draw up articles of impeachment, adopt them, and send them to the Senate, where the probability of a conviction would be zero."
-----------------------------------------

We live in interesting times.

This sounds like this will be his only course of action then. Right now people are horrified, businesses, wall-street, and even other countries because we are near catastrophic consequences that will affect not just our country but others if we don't raise the debt ceiling.

I know he has tried damn hard to work things out. But the radicals have a strangle hold on any Republican that is not a tea partier. There is no more common sense or rational thought within the Republican party right now. It is all about "saving face" now hence that one Rep. saying on camera "we have to get something out of this, and I don't even know what this is".

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

No. Iv'e seen both R and D rebuttals to this. Obama would have done it 6 month or so ago when it was first brought up.

...From the same people who wanted Obama to grab all the AR-15s.

And what were those rebuttals?

It is entirely possible to decline to do something to avoid controversy and to maintain support. But that does not mean he cannot do it legally.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

Unilateral "decision making"

If he staves off economic disaster, then unilateral decision making may redound to his benefit. It all depends on what the alternative is.

And if he DOES do it and the courts take no action, then future Congresses will no longer be able to use the debt ceiling as a threat. The GOP will have shot its wad and gotten nothing in return.

[i'va biggen]

I hope he doesn't, and lets the fucktards flounder around pointing fingers.

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

If he staves off economic disaster, then unilateral decision making may redound to his benefit. It all depends on what the alternative is.

And if he DOES do it and the courts take no action, then future Congresses will no longer be able to use the debt ceiling as a threat. The GOP will have shot its wad and gotten nothing in return.

As the 1st article points out, there are things that could go wrong, the market could plummet, people or countries may not buy the president-issued debt and it could be ten times worse if the repubs in congress didn't bail him out. Like I said, I hope he does, I would like to see what would happen.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

In what way?

Kinda like this...



The yahoos here think they're unique.

[gnadfly]

I didn't know JFK was black.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

If he staves off economic disaster, then unilateral decision making may redound to his benefit. It all depends on what the alternative is.

And if he DOES do it and the courts take no action, then future Congresses will no longer be able to use the debt ceiling as a threat. The GOP will have shot its wad and gotten nothing in return.

Unwad your panties. He would have done it 6 months or so ago if he thought he could. He's a constitutional lawyer, ya' know, and not shy on signing executive orders.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

As the 1st article points out, there are things that could go wrong, the market could plummet, people or countries may not buy the president-issued debt and it could be ten times worse if the repubs in congress didn't bail him out. Like I said, I hope he does, I would like to see what would happen.

So, you are hoping for an economic meltdown? Do I have that right?

Do the debt ceiling warriors on this board not realize that we could end up in a situation FAR WORSE than the 1930s depression?

When Congress votes to spend X while raising a smaller amount Y in revenue, Congress has already decided to increase our debt and has implicitly raised the debt ceiling.

A separate vote on the debt ceiling is ludicrous.

If members of Congress don't have the balls to vote down spending and increase taxes in the first place, they should not be allowed to hide behind a separate vote on the debt ceiling.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

So, you are hoping for an economic meltdown? Do I have that right?

Do the debt ceiling warriors on this board not realize that we could end up in a situation FAR WORSE that the 1930s depression?

When Congress votes to spend X while raising a smaller amount Y in revenue, Congress has already decided to increase our debt and has implicitly raised the debt ceiling.

A separate vote on the debt ceiling is ludicrous.

If members of Congress don't have the balls to vote down spending and increase taxes in the first place, they should not be allowed to hide behind a separate vote on the debt.

amen bro

pay no attention to the simpletons... they're called simpletons for a reason