# The 14th Amendment and the Debt Ceiling
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [October 9, 2013, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739 "2013-10-09T02:01:31Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 3
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/41 "2013-10-09T17:59:31Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> No, that’s a fallacy because you still have debt redemptions to deal with and you can’t roll debt over in time to cover the redemptions so you’re still screwed.
Yes you can, if you create a short-term buffer from the revenues coming in.
---
### Author:  [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/42 "2013-10-09T18:02:59Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> Yes you can, if you create a short-term buffer from the revenues coming in.
The debt, most of it rolls over every 2 years. How exactly do you plan to “buffer” that?
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/43 "2013-10-09T18:03:31Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> You guys are missing a second point, which is that the .gov can pay interest on the debt _AND_ SS benefits without raising the debt ceiling. There’s more than enough federal revenues to cover both, and then quite a bit left over to do other stuff.
[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16739143&postcount=37](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16739143&postcount=37)
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/44 "2013-10-09T18:04:55Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> The debt, all $16T rolls over every 2 years. How exactly do you plan to “buffer” that?
Not all bonds mature at the same time. If it did, it would run afoul of the debt limit - because it never was $32B, was it?
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/45 "2013-10-09T18:08:35Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> That’s bullshit. You’re obviously not familiar with the [legal principle of reliance](http://definitions.uslegal.com/j/justifiable-reliance/). That’s not to say SS is binding contract in the same sense but that it creates a moral obligation founded on the same principles we use in our legal system.
Where, in the stopping of social security, is the fraudulent misrepresentation required by Restatment 2d of Torts § 537 ?
---
### Author:  [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/46 "2013-10-09T18:10:14Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> Not all bonds mature at the same time. If it did, it would run afoul of the debt limit - because it never was $32B, was it?
The debt is $16T. Half of that $8T which means on average more than $300B is rolled over each month. The debt limit isn’t an issue since as you yourself pointed out in another thread, the debt is being ROLLED OVER. You do know what that means, right?
---
### Author:  [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/47 "2013-10-09T18:13:42Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Where, in the stopping of social security, is the fraudulent misrepresentation required by Restatment 2d of Torts § 537 ?
Really? You do know what a moral obligation is, right?
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/48 "2013-10-09T18:16:24Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> **Honesty** has got me thinking about this. Obligation v. debt. We have made a contract with workers since the 1930’s: You pay us X% of your income until age 62 or 65, and we pay you Y amount per month until you die.
>
> Th workers paid until age 62 or 65. We now have a contractual obligation to pay them Y until death. Just like we have a contractual obligation to pay bond holders.
It’s not quite the same, in terms of contract law. For one thing, what kind of contract doesn’t give any choice to the parties purportedly entering into it?
In general, when the government enters into any agreement, it does so either by funding the obligation or by explicitly noting that some or all payments made thereunder are subject to the availability of funds.
> [@](#):
>
> You will get a judgment against you and owe a debt. I’m really not seeing the vast difference.
Again, I understand the desire to see these as identical, but as far as constitutional law goes, they are not. “Debt” is what the Congress borrows on the credit of the United States. It’s not obligations incurred by the government from contracts, promises, or the like.
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/49 "2013-10-09T18:23:27Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> The debt is $16T. Half of that $8T which means on average more than $300B is rolled over each month. The debt limit isn’t an issue since as you yourself pointed out in another thread, the debt is being ROLLED OVER. You do know what that means, right?
Yes. There are two auctions per week. That’s 8 each month. That’s $40B per auction on average. That can be easily buffered using federal revenue.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/50 "2013-10-09T18:23:55Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> Really? You do know what a moral obligation is, right?
Sure. An obligation that someone claims exists but has no remedy at law. You excoriated **Terr** for not knowing “the legal principle of reliance.” Now that I point out the inconvenient fact that the “legal principle of reliance” doesn’t work, your argument shifts.
---
### Author:  [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/51 "2013-10-09T18:24:52Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#):
>
> No, there have been official pronouncements/rulings that benefit payments are not the same as debts in constitutional terms.
I agree that these things are probably not debt in the 14th amendment sense but what are these rulings you are talking about? And does this mean that a failure to increase the dent ceiling could jeopardize these vendors payments? Because some conservatives have been saying the opposite.
---
### Author:  [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/52 "2013-10-09T18:28:41Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> The debt, most of it rolls over every 2 years. How exactly do you plan to “buffer” that?
Moody’s doesn’t seem to think it’s a problem. [Cite](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics-live/liveblog/live-updates-the-shutdown-4/?hpid=z2#c1e3ada3-dc00-41d8-92cb-327c5c814d82):
> [@](#):
>
> We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact.
---
### Author:  [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/53 "2013-10-09T18:28:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Sure. An obligation that someone claims exists but has no remedy at law. You excoriated **Terr** for not knowing “the legal principle of reliance.” Now that I point out the inconvenient fact that the “legal principle of reliance” doesn’t work, your argument shifts.
Obviously you didn’t read my post very carefully or you didn’t grasp its import, let me help you out.
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> That’s bullshit. You’re obviously not familiar with the [legal principle of reliance](http://definitions.uslegal.com/j/justifiable-reliance/). That’s not to say SS is binding contract in the same sense but that it creates a moral obligation founded on the same principles we use in our legal system.
The point was that our legal system is based on moral principles and those principles can’t be ignored in the conduct of the govt’s business. Does that help?
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/54 "2013-10-09T18:34:21Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> The point was that our legal system is based on moral principles and those principles can’t be ignored in the conduct of the govt’s business. Does that help?
Not very much, because it isn’t true. The government can ignore moral principles all they want, as long as they obey the law. So can everyone else.
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/55 "2013-10-09T18:35:47Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#):
>
> I agree that these things are probably not debt in the 14th amendment sense but what are these rulings you are talking about? And does this mean that a failure to increase the dent ceiling could jeopardize these vendors payments? Because some conservatives have been saying the opposite.
I don’t have any cites, to be honest I was relying on something I (thought) I read on another thread here. I’ll back off that point unless I can find anything, but like you I still don’t believe they would be considered 14th Amendment debts.
What do you mean by vendor payments? Do you mean people who have already sold the government goods or services and who have outstanding payables?
---
### Author:  [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/56 "2013-10-09T18:36:33Z")
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> Not very much, because it isn’t true. The government can ignore moral principles all they want, as long as they obey the law. So can everyone else.
>
> Regards,
> Shodan
Oh dear. I don’t think I could have figured that one out on my own.
---
### Author:  [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/57 "2013-10-09T18:39:01Z")
> [@deltasigma](#):
>
> Oh dear. I don’t think I could have figured that one out on my own.
Is sarcasm your way of conceding the point?
---
### Author:  [@zamboniracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zamboniracer)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/58 "2013-10-09T18:39:27Z")
> [@Lemur866](#):
>
> Right. The problem is not that we are spending too much, or that taxes aren’t high enough, or that we aren’t borrowing enough. All those things might be true, but they aren’t the root of the debt crisis.
>
> The root of the debt crisis is that Congress has legally set spending at X, and taxes at Y, and borrowing at Z. The president does not have the authority to lower spending, or raise taxes, or increase borrowing on his own, those are the prerogative of Congress. The problem is that at current levels X\>Y+Z.
>
> So congress must either lower X, or raise Y, or raise Z, or some combination of all three. Cutting spending is unpopular because all the Tea Partiers need their social security and medicare. Raising taxes is unpopular because obviously. So the real world solution is to raise the amount we borrow.
Well put, but I disagree with the assertion that only Congress has the authority to set X, Y and Z. Each of those legal enactments must be in legislation signed by the President. Otherwise, if X, Y and Z are out of whack (as they appear to be with the debt limit), the President would just wash his hands and say, you guys created this mess, you fix it.
---
### Author:  [@deltasigma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deltasigma)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/59 "2013-10-09T18:41:35Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> Is sarcasm your way of conceding the point?
[sigh]no, it’s my way of saying it’s a non-point worthy only of a non-response. If you don’t see why then there’s really no point in any further explanation.
---
### Author:  [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2013, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739/60 "2013-10-09T18:42:44Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#):
>
> I don’t have any cites, to be honest I was relying on something I (thought) I read on another thread here. I’ll back off that point unless I can find anything, but like you I still don’t believe they would be considered 14th Amendment debts.
>
> What do you mean by vendor payments? Do you mean people who have already sold the government goods or services and who have outstanding payables?
While not explicitly 14th Amendment related, [Flemming v. Nestor (1960)](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=363&invol=603) notes that Social Security benefits are not property or a contractual obligation and thus not subject to the “takings clause.” So a person who was denied their benefits at an individual level like Nestor was, would only be protected by the due process clause of the constitution.
The fact that the court rejected the concept that they were property or a contractual obligation would suggest to me they could not be considered part of the debt outstanding.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739.md?page=2)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-14th-amendment-and-the-debt-ceiling/670739.md?page=4)