If no deal comes on debt limit, President Obama needs to invoke 14th admendment

[WI_DEM]

and tell Boehner and House GOP to go "fu** themselves" and if they wan't to pursue it they can in the courts--but he's not going to allow them to destroy the credit and economy of the USA. He needs to take decisive action and if he does I believe the people of the USA by and large will support him.

[catbyte]

1. I wish he had the guts to do it, but I am sinking into deep despair

by his wishy-washy-ness. Really. I hold out no hope for this country. We are well and truly fucked.

:cry:

Diane
Anishinaabe in MI

[Ganja Ninja]

6. Sadly I agree.

The Republicans could collapse the economy and he would still be trying desperately to get them to like him. I just don't understand why he keeps going back for more when he keeps getting the door slammed in his face.

[catbyte]

14. He's like Charlie Brown & Lucy keeps yanking the football away

[seabeckind]

9. Ahah! Got you right where they want you. n/t

[Imajika]

2. Obama may have to, but it would be a political disaster for him...

If he does that he will completely own the debt. The only way he could make that work is AFTER a default and all the chaos that comes with it. If huge percentages of the American people are clamoring for something to be done, then maybe Obama could get away with that politically. Right now not nearly enough people are paying attention, and when polled many/most claim they don't want the debt ceiling raised, support balanced budget amendments, etc.

[jtown1123]

15. Why would he own it? He has to tell pple their interest rates will skyrocket w/o it

it isn't new debt, it's debt we already paid for...

[Imajika]

22. You know without major budget cuts we may well be downgraded anyway?

S&P and Moody's are both threatening that very thing. These corrupt ratings agencies are demanding massive cuts - much the way they have been doing in Europe. Hate to say it, but "austerity" is here now. We aren't talking about what things we can fund to spur the economy at all anymore, it's ONLY about what to slash and gut. There is literally no chance of any stimulus now, only thing on the plate is what pieces of the safety net to dismantle first.

If the President takes the Congress out of the loop where the debt ceiling is concerned, he will completely own it. The economy is in bad shape and may be on the verge of getting much worse, the President needs to make Republicans share in that not take all the blame for himself.

[girl gone mad]

23. No, it's his constitutional duty.

Amendment 14, Section 4 U.S. Constitution:

“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.”

As long as he has the means to create the money to pay off these debts, he is obligated by law to do so.

[WI_DEM]

3. and p.s. let the house impeach him, the senate won't convict him and being impeached by the GOP

didn't do any harm to Bill Clinton on a matter of much less consequences to the nation and it won't hurt Obama either--in fact, it will enhance him and make them look even more pity and partisan.

[DURHAM D]

11. Exactly - and timing on the announcement is everything.

I assume Obama is staying away from use of the 14th Amendment because he voted against an increase in the debt limit while in the Senate, at least I read that somewhere.

If true, all he needs to do is own it and say he made a mistake. Just get out in front of it.
Voters like it when a politician says they made a mistake - makes them seem more real and right now I think Obama has not clearly let us know that he feels our pain.

[N7Shepard]

4. Not yet grasshopper.

[dawg]

5. The Supreme Court could rule it illegal.

But I'm pretty sure, that even if all nine of them came in force to try to storm the Treasury Department, they would fail.

[lumberjack_jeff]

13. The constitution is pretty clear on that point.

Congress is violating it.

When the president is simply doing what the congress is obligated to do, I don't see any huge risk.

A more likely result of the lawsuit is that congress process of debt ceiling "control" is ruled unconstitutional. Guys, if you don't like deficits, don't pass budgets with them.

[onenote]

18. In my experience, when lawyers claim the constitution is clear on a disputed point

they are wrong 50 percent of the time. Not sure if you're a lawyer,but my guess is that your certainty regarding the clarity of the Constitutional issues involved is not matched by the reality of the situation.

[renegade2011]

25. Irrelevant:

1. Even assuming that there *is* some sort of counter-case/grey-area issue, that's where lawsuits (and possible censure) would come into play. The trick is to get the debt-ceiling thing handled in a way that does NOT damage the "Full faith and credit" of the U.S. (because doing so risks BOTH sides getting the blame, even if it's not true -- the infamous "both sides do it" meme).
Worst-case scenario is that the Repugs subject Obama to a show-trial (which they've already threatened). Even if, somehow, it did turn out that the 14th Amendment clause in question *wasn't* applicable -- which is a big stretch -- and he HAD thus violated the law, the worst that happens is he gets booted out/resigns, and we end up with Biden. Even in that "wort-case scenario":

1. The Teatards don't get to provoke a default
2. They *do* get to take the politically-suicidal step of impeaching the first African-American president, when EVERYBODY already knows how racist the "movement" they represent actually is. Can you say "no non-white votes"? Demographically, that's a serious loss for Right-wingers, long term.
3. A Teabagger show-trial would -- hopefully -- give Moderates/Liberals/"Progressives" something to rally around (being as Obama has been EXTREMELY moderate and "bipartisan" for a "Kenyan Usurper" etc.)

Infinitely better for the Left overall, than some silly puppet-show with Bernie Sanders primarying Obama (which is guaranteed to go nowhere).

[renegade2011]

7. Agreed:

1. Right-wingers already hate him, so there's really no danger of him "damaging" that relationship.

2. If he invoked the 14th Amendment, he'd be demonstrating (yet again) that the Teabagger caucus is woefully ignorant of the *one* document they've spent so much time posturing about -- the U.S. Constitution. Basically, at this point, anything that makes Teabaggers (or Right-wingers in general) end up looking stupid is a "win" in my book.

On the other hand, damaging the global economy (yet again) *would* make the Republicans/Teabaggers look worse, and might be helpful in the 2012 election -- since THEY were the ones blathering about how default would be "no big deal". Obama has been (as usual) WAY too "reasonable", and WAY too much into compromise (I think he's still assuming that his opponents are actually reasonably sane). If the United States were culturally sane (which is debatable, given the existence of the Tea Party), the coming disaster on August 2nd would be enough to FINALLY discredit Right-wing ideology completely -- as if everything since 2008 wasn't enough already. Unfortunately, your stereotypical Fox "news" viewer/Teabagger is more likely to blame the "kenyan Usurper" than look at his or her own ideology. (Plus, Teabaggers get to play "dress up", and look like the guy on the Quaker Oats box!)

Agreed about invoking the 14th, though, yeah.

[N7Shepard]

10. That's why he needs to do it if an acceptable bill doesn't get

through congress and to his desk.

He should be willing to veto anything that has cuts to the big three.

He should be willing to veto anything that is just a short term debt ceiling increase.

Then he can invoke the 14th if August 2nd comes.

[PotatoChip]

8. I agree.

Plan A isn't looking that great right now. Just in case our efforts with our respective Congressional Reps fail, perhaps we all should be prepared to urge the President to listen to the Big Dog on this one.

[lumberjack_jeff]

12. When faced with the consequences of default, the risks of executive action are trivial.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/11/993352/-Coin-Seigniorage,-the-Debt-Limit,-and-the-Presidents-Duty

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/10/993075/-Scott-Fullwiler:-QE3,-Treasury-Style%E2%80%94Go-Around,-Not-Over-the-Debt-Ceiling-Limit?via=history

[Shrek]

16. Suppose he does what you suggest

Who's going to buy the debt? At what cost?

No investor is going to risk real money on debt instruments of questionable legality, especially if the courts can weigh in later and invalidate them.

[onenote]

17. its unclear that the 14th amendment solution would stave off some of the worst effects of default

For example, its likely that the credit agencies would still downgrade the government's credit rating.

Now, from what is being said, the same thing may happen if Boehner's plan is adopted -- so why not reluctantly throw in the towel, making it clear that you are accepting their terms, but that the consequences belong entirely on the repubs.

[pansypoo53219]

19. i want him to to a jujitsu on their asses using the 14th amendment

when they bring a deal w/ NO REVENUE/tax loophole closes.
shit. let the bush tax cuts die NOW.
and put greenspan on trial for destroying the economy for supporting the tax cuts.

[jtown1123]

20. He has already said he won't. We're screwed.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ladjf]

21. As an alternate to invoking the 14th amendment, could he create

an executive order ruling that would quash the debt limit law?

[Zebedeo]

24. The president does not get to decide that a law is unconstitutional

That is the province of the judiciary branch of government. It is part of the checks and balances of our system of government.

[lumberjack_jeff]

27. No, but he does have to do his best to uphold the constitution.

If failure to raise the debt limit jeopardizes the full faith and credit of the US, he's obliged to use whatever executive power he has to avoid that.

In other threads, some people have made compelling arguments that the 14th is irrelevant to this discussion. The essential argument is; without borrowing, the government has plenty of revenue to pay to service existing debt. If congress wants to effectively delegate to the president to cut the budget 40% or 50%, that's their prerogative.

I'm unconvinced that this is an absolute deal killer. If the president makes the case that failing to fund the budgeted deficit irreparably harms national security, and was essentially a failure of housekeeping in congress, he could defend that case in court. Besides, by the time it is resolved it will be after the election.

It is also the best case scenario because it protects healthcare, pensions and SS.

[Fire1]

Maybe and maybe not. Of course I have little faith in the

american people.

[Fire1]

28. dupe.