• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Can President Obama Unilaterally Raise the Debt Ceiling?

aberrant85

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
594
Reaction score
209
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/03/business/wall-st-fears-go-beyond-shutdown.html?hp&_r=0

If the debt ceiling is not raised by [Oct 17], the Treasury estimates it will be left with about only $30 billion in cash, which would be used up in a matter of days.

As a result, economists and investors have quietly begun to explore the options the White House might have in the event Congress fails to act.

The most widely discussed strategy would be for President Obama to invoke authority under the 14th Amendment and essentially order the federal government to keep borrowing, an option that was endorsed by former President Bill Clinton during an earlier debt standoff in 2011.

And in recent days, prominent Democrats like Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, have urged the White House to seriously consider such a route, even if it might provoke a threat of impeachment from House Republicans and ultimately require the Supreme Court to rule on its legitimacy.

Other potential October surprises range from the logistically forbidding, like prioritizing payments, issuing i.o.u.’s or selling off gold and other assets, to more fanciful ideas, like minting a trillion-dollar platinum coin.


The trillion dollar coin idea, reminiscent of Mr. Burns, is based on a law that says that the US can mint a coin of pure platinum in any denomination, essentially giving us $1T extra to use in case of a looming default.

If the effects of a debt default would be so grievous to the economy, would Obama see it necessary to use his authority to raise the debt ceiling himself?

And where would it go from there?
 
This is like watching the Jersey shore in terms of stupidity. Now i never watched the jersey shore therefore i don't know who the hell would stand for this sort of crap.

The debt limit needs to be raised. there is no ****ing alternative around it. And I shutter to think that due to congressional incompetence, the president would have to absorb more powers. Can you not see that this is the path to a less democratic society? A less free society? This is the path to tyranny.

And no, it's not just republicans. All of congress is to blame for this idiocy because neither part cares about the country, all they care about is how they look. It's like they are playing a miss america contest. ****s.
 
This is like watching the Jersey shore in terms of stupidity. Now i never watched the jersey shore therefore i don't know who the hell would stand for this sort of crap.

The debt limit needs to be raised. there is no ****ing alternative around it. And I shutter to think that due to congressional incompetence, the president would have to absorb more powers. Can you not see that this is the path to a less democratic society? A less free society? This is the path to tyranny.

And no, it's not just republicans. All of congress is to blame for this idiocy because neither part cares about the country, all they care about is how they look. It's like they are playing a miss america contest. ****s.

A good example of this is when they passed a bill to exclusively restore funding to the TSA during the sequester because it directly effected them. Of course Obama let them do that without saying "That's cool that you want your flights to go more smoothly, but I'm vetoing unless you return funding to a program my constituency wants funded". I wish Obama understood the concept of "two can play that game".
 
The most widely discussed strategy would be for President Obama to invoke authority under the 14th Amendment and essentially order the federal government to keep borrowing, an option that was endorsed by former President Bill Clinton during an earlier debt standoff in 2011.

I think that, if in the meantime, there is no resolution regarding the shutdown, and if there's nothing promising sketched out for resolving the debt deal, he'll definitely do something like this. He'll be able to point to the measure as necessity in the face of Congress not functioning. It's no different than any other authority or power the executive branch has claimed for itself over the past few years, anyway. If Congress can't do its job and pay for the spending they've already legislated, then it's their fault if they cede more power to the executive.
 
A good example of this is when they passed a bill to exclusively restore funding to the TSA during the sequester because it directly effected them. Of course Obama let them do that without saying "That's cool that you want your flights to go more smoothly, but I'm vetoing unless you return funding to a program my constituency wants funded". I wish Obama understood the concept of "two can play that game".

Obama is too stupid to know how to play any game except the "blame bush" game. I'm sorry, but it's the truth. he can't manage his job. He doesn't have the charm Reagan had, he doesn't have the balls Bush had, he doesn't have the know-how that Clinton had.
And that would be ok if Congress would be filled with competent people who actually cared about their country. But that's not the case either.

Anyway. It's not obama's fault this is the situation. Obama can't pass a budget and then still call himself the leader of a free and democratic country. He has to just act on the budget that is passed by Congress. He can submit a budget but that can be thrown out. The point is that the democrats in Congress are running a popularity contest and are lazy politically... they just want to get a free ride to the next election because they're too stupid to work with the current situation.. and the republicans are spiteful and angry and they're on autopilot: anything obama does, we need to attack it. If obama hugs a cat, we need to kill the cat. Morons.
 
I've pondered the constitutionality of a debt ceiling in the first place. We're constitutionally barred from defaulting, but when spending is mandated by law and a borrowing limit exists, that leaves a situation in which default is necessary. Which is exactly what Congress has done, they've passed legislation throughout our nations history that has created this spending problem. You can't just stop paying for things your own laws say you're going to pay for.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/03/business/wall-st-fears-go-beyond-shutdown.html?hp&_r=0

If the debt ceiling is not raised by [Oct 17], the Treasury estimates it will be left with about only $30 billion in cash, which would be used up in a matter of days.

As a result, economists and investors have quietly begun to explore the options the White House might have in the event Congress fails to act.

The most widely discussed strategy would be for President Obama to invoke authority under the 14th Amendment and essentially order the federal government to keep borrowing, an option that was endorsed by former President Bill Clinton during an earlier debt standoff in 2011.

And in recent days, prominent Democrats like Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, have urged the White House to seriously consider such a route, even if it might provoke a threat of impeachment from House Republicans and ultimately require the Supreme Court to rule on its legitimacy.

Other potential October surprises range from the logistically forbidding, like prioritizing payments, issuing i.o.u.’s or selling off gold and other assets, to more fanciful ideas, like minting a trillion-dollar platinum coin.


The trillion dollar coin idea, reminiscent of Mr. Burns, is based on a law that says that the US can mint a coin of pure platinum in any denomination, essentially giving us $1T extra to use in case of a looming default.

If the effects of a debt default would be so grievous to the economy, would Obama see it necessary to use his authority to raise the debt ceiling himself?

And where would it go from there?

Exactly what do they think in the 14th amendment gives him such authority?

The fed is claiming that if we fail to borrow more money, then we will default upon loans already made. If we are borrowing money to pay loans, then whether we nose dive today or 10 years from now, we are still in a death spiral of debt. If raising interest rates is going to have such a detrimental affect upon the economy, then that is a clear sign that the economy is based upon credit not reality. In other words, we're ****ed. It's going to crash, Obama and the Dems are just trying to not have it crash while they are hold the White House. In other words, they want to keep borrowing to hide the problem until an opportunity arises to blame it on a Rep.

The government doesn't need to borrow more money. They need to tighten spending to end this credit death spiral. They also need a thorough review of laws affecting business, chunk out totally or reduce any that are driving business away from America. Americans need tighten their own budgets and reduce then eliminate unnecessary debt from the overuse of credit. Americans also need to start finding representatives that will work to end this death spiral today, not those who promise to not spend increases in tax revenue in some future congress which most of them won't even be members of and who can override anything they promise now anyway. Time to stop passing it on and do something about it NOW!
 
Good lord, the silly "14th Amendment" thing again. That is an absurd reading of it made up on the spot to try to give the President a power he absolutely does not have.
 
I most definitely believe Pres Obama will do this. Then the Supreme Court will get it, rule on it in like 4 years, say it was unconstitutional, and Pres Obama will be sitting back with this look on his face:
images (1).jpg
 
I've pondered the constitutionality of a debt ceiling in the first place. We're constitutionally barred from defaulting, but when spending is mandated by law and a borrowing limit exists, that leaves a situation in which default is necessary. Which is exactly what Congress has done, they've passed legislation throughout our nations history that has created this spending problem. You can't just stop paying for things your own laws say you're going to pay for.

Of course you stop paying for things. It's happening right now.

Nobody to blame but the Senate and Obama but it is what it is. As the law requires.
 
Of course you stop paying for things. It's happening right now.

Nobody to blame but the Senate and Obama but it is what it is. As the law requires.

Obama and the Dems were not making any demands of the Republicans. Check me if I am wrong but the Republicans were making the demands and basically saying if you don't do this we are shutting the government down how is it Obama's fault again or Dems? Hell America doesn't agree with how Republicans have acted, are they not the party of the people.
 
The government doesn't need to borrow more money. They need to tighten spending to end this credit death spiral. They also need a thorough review of laws affecting business, chunk out totally or reduce any that are driving business away from America. Americans need tighten their own budgets and reduce then eliminate unnecessary debt from the overuse of credit. Americans also need to start finding representatives that will work to end this death spiral today, not those who promise to not spend increases in tax revenue in some future congress which most of them won't even be members of and who can override anything they promise now anyway. Time to stop passing it on and do something about it NOW!

It's not so simple. Most of our current deficit problem is not excess spending, since that's gone down, but less taxes coming in from less people working and more workers making less money.

Now is not the time to cut spending, that exacerbates the problem. We need to maintain our safety net, support the middle class, and reassure the markets with policy makers that act responsibly and not unsettle a shaky economy. We have to grow our way out of the deficit, like they did in the 90's.
 
The Baby Boomers weren't retiring in the 90s.

As for the OP, I do think the President would be on firm ground invoking the 14th amendment. Regardless of what a mere statute says, the US may not default on debts.
 
Obama and the Dems were not making any demands of the Republicans. Check me if I am wrong but the Republicans were making the demands and basically saying if you don't do this we are shutting the government down how is it Obama's fault again or Dems? Hell America doesn't agree with how Republicans have acted, are they not the party of the people.

OK. You are checked for being wrong.
 
This is like watching the Jersey shore in terms of stupidity. Now i never watched the jersey shore therefore i don't know who the hell would stand for this sort of crap.

The debt limit needs to be raised. there is no ****ing alternative around it. And I shutter to think that due to congressional incompetence, the president would have to absorb more powers. Can you not see that this is the path to a less democratic society? A less free society? This is the path to tyranny.

And no, it's not just republicans. All of congress is to blame for this idiocy because neither part cares about the country, all they care about is how they look. It's like they are playing a miss america contest. ****s.

I get where you are coming from and agree completely, however, that then makes me ask then question Why do you still vote? You and others around the county have acknowledged and said things like neither party cares and that they are both servants to corporations. In doing that you are acknowledging that you do not have control over your own government. You cannot regain control by voting as both parties as a whole no matter the candidates are owned by banks, lobbyists, and the like, thus voting would seem to be illogical. So I have to ask, in knowing that your government is bought out and that they do not care, why do you still vote?

Crap. I forgot that you are not an American, but still, I pose my question to other Americans.
 
I've pondered the constitutionality of a debt ceiling in the first place. We're constitutionally barred from defaulting, but when spending is mandated by law and a borrowing limit exists, that leaves a situation in which default is necessary. Which is exactly what Congress has done, they've passed legislation throughout our nations history that has created this spending problem. You can't just stop paying for things your own laws say you're going to pay for.

Raising a debt ceiling for present payments implies the money was never there. Debt ceilings are for future expenditures. We don't have an FY14 budget. It's FY13 money that is keeping things going.
 
Of course you stop paying for things. It's happening right now.

Nobody to blame but the Senate and Obama but it is what it is. As the law requires.

The law also requires certain services to be operational.
 
I get where you are coming from and agree completely, however, that then makes me ask then question Why do you still vote? You and others around the county have acknowledged and said things like neither party cares and that they are both servants to corporations. In doing that you are acknowledging that you do not have control over your own government. You cannot regain control by voting as both parties as a whole no matter the candidates are owned by banks, lobbyists, and the like, thus voting would seem to be illogical. So I have to ask, in knowing that your government is bought out and that they do not care, why do you still vote?

Crap. I forgot that you are not an American, but still, I pose my question to other Americans.

I believe people still vote because there political parties they identify the the closes to they want in office or their just choosing the lesser of two evils .
 
Raising a debt ceiling for present payments implies the money was never there. Debt ceilings are for future expenditures. We don't have an FY14 budget. It's FY13 money that is keeping things going.

Except it is for present payments. These various services, expenditures, and programs still exist. The FAA still has a mandate for air safety that they are unable to fulfill.

Plus, this time the debt ceiling (almost) matching up with the fiscal year is more of a coincidence. A CR passed today through the end of next February still leaves us with a debt ceiling problem.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/03/business/wall-st-fears-go-beyond-shutdown.html?hp&_r=0

If the debt ceiling is not raised by [Oct 17], the Treasury estimates it will be left with about only $30 billion in cash, which would be used up in a matter of days.


I find this whole thing a little hard to buy into.

If the government is spending less money now than before the partial shutdown, the kitty should hold up longer.

If the government is spending less money now than before the partial shutdown and taxes are still flowing into the government, the kitty should hold up a lot longer.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/03/business/wall-st-fears-go-beyond-shutdown.html?hp&_r=0

If the debt ceiling is not raised by [Oct 17], the Treasury estimates it will be left with about only $30 billion in cash, which would be used up in a matter of days.

As a result, economists and investors have quietly begun to explore the options the White House might have in the event Congress fails to act.

The most widely discussed strategy would be for President Obama to invoke authority under the 14th Amendment and essentially order the federal government to keep borrowing, an option that was endorsed by former President Bill Clinton during an earlier debt standoff in 2011.

And in recent days, prominent Democrats like Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, have urged the White House to seriously consider such a route, even if it might provoke a threat of impeachment from House Republicans and ultimately require the Supreme Court to rule on its legitimacy.

Other potential October surprises range from the logistically forbidding, like prioritizing payments, issuing i.o.u.’s or selling off gold and other assets, to more fanciful ideas, like minting a trillion-dollar platinum coin.


The trillion dollar coin idea, reminiscent of Mr. Burns, is based on a law that says that the US can mint a coin of pure platinum in any denomination, essentially giving us $1T extra to use in case of a looming default.

If the effects of a debt default would be so grievous to the economy, would Obama see it necessary to use his authority to raise the debt ceiling himself?

And where would it go from there?

Gee, why stop there. Why doesn't Obama have the mint strike a coin in the denomination of the amount that every foreign country holds - give China a $1.5 trillion coin and send them on their way - let them try to cash it at the local Bejing McDonalds - and you can then lop off about $5 to $6 trillion from the national debt and no more debt ceiling problems. Your currency might tank, but since when was that a concern of liberals.

Obama raising the debt ceiling without congressional authorization would be just as crazy but far from impossible when liberals are in charge.
 
Gee, why stop there. Why doesn't Obama have the mint strike a coin in the denomination of the amount that every foreign country holds - give China a $1.5 trillion coin and send them on their way - let them try to cash it at the local Bejing McDonalds - and you can then lop off about $5 to $6 trillion from the national debt and no more debt ceiling problems. Your currency might tank, but since when was that a concern of liberals.

Obama raising the debt ceiling without congressional authorization would be just as crazy but far from impossible when liberals are in charge.

He wouldn't have to do anything if crazy conservatives weren't forcing him.
 
The Baby Boomers weren't retiring in the 90s.

As for the OP, I do think the President would be on firm ground invoking the 14th amendment. Regardless of what a mere statute says, the US may not default on debts.


The US will NOT, and I repeat will NOT default on its debt. That's a talking point and is an outright lie to ill-informed people. All it means is that money targeted for something else will now be used to pay down debt. As an example, instead of 500 million to Solyndra, we pay our debt. Doesn't get more simple than that.


Tim-
 
Back
Top Bottom