Say the Senate passes something today, but then the House defeats it and we actually start heading into default.
As we are now down to the wire, can and should Obama then immediately point to he 14th Amendment- the section about the legitimacy of all U.S. public debt, and just go ahead and raise the debt ceiling so the the debt actually remains legitimate?
In my opinion, the current system has been demonstrated to be broken. It makes little sense for the US to have to approve a debt ceiling anyways. No other constitutional county has such a handicap on the government. Given what current events has demonstrated, I think it would be for the best if Obama (and all future presidents) were able to raise it on an as needed basis.
Would Obama have popular support for this move? I think probably so given current events. The Tea Party people would shit a brick - but they do that anyways. Yet more calls for impeachment - big deal. And the House would still have to get it together and fund the government - but at least the debt would be valid and the US and world economy would be stable.
Could Obama actually make this happen on a technical level, by getting lawyers on his side declaring the legitimacy of the action and then making the executive orders?
Irresponsible representatives and the fools that elected them should not avoid the consequences of their actions. If that means the rest of us have to hurt as well, so be it, it’s the only way anything will change.
The system is broken because voters have put maniacs into office. The remedy you propose is to destroy part of the checks and balances of the Constitution. This, in my view, is the same justification for third world armed forces to override democratically elected governments as they see fit.
As a party-line Democratic voter, I would support impeachment of any President who attempted to seize Article I powers in this blatantly illegal manner. It is an egregious violation of the Constitution, law, and the President’s oath of office.
It is not illegal if he declares a state of emergency. This opinion piece from the Brooking Institute argues:
“President Obama would look like a strong leader, guiding the nation out of an impending disaster. And once the debt ceiling was raised, Congress would be put in the position of needing to assemble a majority in both the House and the Senate willing to vote on record to undo the President’s actions, and thus ensuring default. In other words, Congress would need to take positive action to ensure an economic crisis. Such an act would be political suicide.”
Yes, and Colonel Khadaffi, Saddam Hussein, and that German dude surely declared a states of emergency and looked like strong leaders when they succeeded in illegally seizing power in their respective countries.
The author of that article should be ashamed, and I sincerely hope that he does not turn his think-tank job into any position of responsibility in the U.S. Government in the future.
This would be a tenable comparison if Obama had opposing members of Congress shot. Or if Congress votes to impeach him and he calls out the military rather than stepping down.
As stated, it’s simply ridiculous. The President can disagree with Congress about what how the Constitution requires him to fullfill his duty. If the Congress doesn’t like it, they can take him to court or impeach him.
In my opinion, the President should not intervene unless and until an actual default happens. And if a default happens, then it s the Congress that collectively violated the Constitution and the President is entitled to act.
But in any case, I would be content with the process so long as the President is willing to obey either a Supreme Court decision or a successful impeachment by the Congress.