Associated Press
Have you ever heard the theatrical saying, "If there's a gun on the stage, it has to go off"? I think about the adage often when pondering the debt ceiling.
Between 1939 and 2010, Congress raised the debt limit 89 times. It was an easy, routine bit of legislative paperwork -- the issue came up 89 times, and in 89 instances, Congress passed a clean bill. Even during the Bush presidency, Republicans raised the debt ceiling, without strings or preconditions, seven times. The current GOP leadership in Washington -- John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, et all -- has voted to raise the debt limit 19 times. Bush's former budget director said this "ought to be treated as the housekeeping matter it is."
For 71 years, in other words, the gun on the stage sat untouched by both parties.
In 2011, congressional Republicans, for the first time in American history, decided to pick up the gun, load it, and wave it around. Never before had an entire major-party caucus threatened the full faith and credit of the United States, and the man-made crisis that ensued was brutal, both for our economy, our political health, and our standing on the global stage.
Eventually, Democrats accepted concessions, and convinced Republicans to put down the gun. But early next year, it will time for another debt-ceiling vote, and GOP leaders have already said they're once again prepared to do significant damage to the country, on purpose, unless new demands are met. With that in mind, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner believes it's time to take the gun off the stage permanently.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the U.S. "absolutely" should get rid of the debt ceiling as soon as possible.
"It would have been time a long time ago to eliminate it," Geithner told Bloomberg TV on Friday. "The sooner the better." [...]
"Only once, last summer, did people decide to use it to threaten default on the American credit for the first time in history as a tool for political advantage," he continued. "And that's not a tenable strategy for the country."
Quite right. Having a debate over whether the United States will deliberately default on its debts -- not to go through with it, just having the debate itself -- is incredibly damaging. But knowing that the gun on the stage may go off eventually is itself dangerous, and in need of a resolution.
Matt Miller had a good column on this the other day.
The president knows he can't let the precedent established last year become the new normal in budget talks. He knows the debt ceiling is a weird relic that no other country (save Denmark, sort of) possesses. In most nations, the act of the legislature passing a budget simultaneously authorizes its treasury to borrow whatever debt that budget contains. That's only common sense.
If Ben Bernanke can press the limits of legal authority to save the economy, and Obama himself can press these limits to approve a "hit list" for drones, then defanging the debt ceiling should be child's play by comparison. [...]
Time to remove the fiscal appendix, Mr. President. For sane governance to live, the debt limit must die.
For the record, the nation is on track to next hit the debt ceiling in February. If the White House doesn't make this part of the ongoing fiscal talks, it's making a mistake.
Leave a Comment:
While a "relic" the "debt ceiling" is one of those things from another time when both "common sense and the nation" itself came before ideology/party loyalty. Unfortunately, those times have past and WE need to get rid of it. The sad part is that its not that democrats would or have ever used it to "get their own way", it's all been on "the party of NO"! One might think that the GOTP would have some sense of shame for their actions in lowering our credit rating - but that might mean that they actually have a conscious and a working brain.
"would have some sense of shame for their actions in lowering our credit rating"
Worse than that the had the temerity to use it in their ads and Ryan used it in his speech :
President Obama caused the credit rating of the United States to go down
http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-ryan-speech-fact-check-on-aaa-credit-rating-2012-8
The US will not, can not, default.
The ones who keep bringing up default are you the Democrats.
Have you also forgotten how Obama tried to scare the bejeesus out of seniors by threatening their SS checks? That's just cruel and another reason Benghazi won't go away. Obama has demonstrated conclusively he'll do anything for political advantage.
No, the debt ceiling will never be abolished. It's the only thing between the country and the "free stuff" advocacy.
Funny. I remember President Obama sating, on ntional TV, that all SS checks would be sent out ON time. More than once he did this.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-threatens-withhold-social-security-checks-debt-ceiling-183600627.html
Only a nutcase committs suicide and the debt ceiling is suicidal! Only a loon would defend the debt ceiling but then these nuts love to create conflict,here and abroad.
Just like speed limits on the road are suicidal? Once again the party of free-stuff demonstrates it will say anything, no matter how stupid, to spend other people's money.
Greed isn't wanting to keep more of what one earns... greed is coveting those earnings for yourself.
The President can unilaterally rid the country of the debt limit. He can either use the 14th Amendment or he can have the U.S. mint print as many $ trillion coins as is necessary. Would it piss off the Republicans? Yep. Who the hell cares at this point? In fact, that would be my preferred method of ridding the country of this stupidity if Republicans even hint at the hostage-taking stunt they tried in the summer of 2011. Will Obama do it? Sheeeshh..., I almost don't want to know.
I'm with you. If I were Obama, I would find the strategy that annoys the Republicans the most and go with it.
DisgustedWithitAll, have you read the 14th Amendment? I think not.
14th Amendment, Section 5: The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of the article.
Yep, they can enforce it when necessary. They can't un-enforce it. That's why it's in the Constitution.
They also used to have the power to regulate whether we went to war or not; you can thank good ole Dubya, and even Saint Ronnie, for that change.
That's different, grumpy. Some knucklehead here is trying to claim that Congress can keep the country from paying the bills it had already obligated the country to by NOT enforcing the 14th Amendment. It takes some empty-headed and obtuse thinking to get that out of the last clause of an Amendment to the Constitution. That implies a real ignorance about what the Constitution is even for. Tea-bagger?
You misconstrue the point of this all, that you, in fact, are the ignorant one. The Constitution first and foremost sets forth the concept of seperation of powers and articulates the scope of each respective branch of government powers. Congress was vested with the power to enforce the 14th Amendment, not the President.
Are you still beating your head against the wall on this? Congress can not violate the Constitution. End of discussion.
Gee it seems the constitution is hanging by a thread. And Romney is still the Anti-Christ and has done his damage. And he still keeps running his yapper.
No, we just have some tilting-at-windmills fake Don Quixote who doesn't know what's he's talking about but thinks he's a Constitutional scholar. Gotta be a Tea Potty boy; they're all like that.
Disgusted seems to be correct re the 14th Amendment. It states under section 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."
How then can Congress question the public debt or cause it to be questioned? Is it possible that our members of Congress don't understand the public debt and what raising the debt ceiling means? That's kind of scary.
BTW, doesn't the 14th Amendment also cover the Social Security Trust Fund currently invested in Government Bonds? Just curious what others think about that.
Disgusted, I agree that Congress simply cannot ingnore its obligation under the Constitution. In fact I have not expressed an opinion with respect that issue at all in any of my posts.
Also, I never claimed to a Constitutional scholar nor I am a member of the tea party. But I am very interested to learn about the Constitution from somebody that clearly knows what they are talking about...I mean its obvious such a clear statement (that being Section 5 of the 14th Amendment) could otherwise be interpreted to mean something else.
Simply stated the 14th Amendment does NOT vest any authority in the executive branch of the federal government. But then again maybe my Constitution is missing some language.
Please educate me, who knows maybe I can use your wisdom as CLE credit to maintain my law license in Pennsylvania.
Yes, you did, bozo. It's impossible to believe you're trying to weasel out of your stupid assertions above. If you knew the Constitution you'd know there's another reason -- a very weak one, in my opinion -- for the President to not use the 14th Amendment as an escape out of the debt ceiling stupidity (that only one other nation on Earth has). But it isn't your obtuse understanding of Section 5 of Amendment 14. SMDH.
I know it doesn't take much to get through law school but I thought it would take a bit more brains than you're displaying. Whatever, fella. Try to figure this out when you can. It's a complete waste of my time.
Didn't the agreement last year include some provision that was going to allow the president to raise the ceiling without having to go through this rigamarole with these pieces of something you scrape off your shoe? I seem to recall that he could do it and they could huff and puff and scream and yell, and it would be done anyway. It was their "concession" after figuring out they had well and truly screwed themselves on this.
It is, quite frankly, the actions of fools like these people that result in the fall of republics and the rise of Caesars who the people trust to fix the broken state. Julius Caesar was welcomed as a reformer and a rescuer who would deal with the dysfunctional Roman Senate. We all know how that turned out.
No, all it did was get the country through the election so it wouldn't come up during the campaign. Good thing, too. If the asswholes would politicize the nothingburger Benghazi, and we'd already seen what they were willing to do with the debt ceiling in 2011, can you imagine what the piggish GOP would have done with the debt ceiling during the eye of the campaign hurricane?
It is also time to scrap Geitner and get non-Wall Street economic advisors for Obama.
I would vote for this comment 10 times if I could.
The 14th Amendment is still available. Even Bill Clinton thought it should have been used last time. Obama said he couldn't because Lawrence Tribe didn't think he could. Last time I looked, Lawrence Tribe wasn't elected to anything and the language as well as the one case interpreting it is more persuasive than "Lawrence Tribe said".
I stopped listening to Tribe when his arguments were used to trash gun control laws by the Constitutional originalists.
Tribe is the leading legal authority on the US Constitution. He wrote text books that are used in law schools.
I know that. Text book writing in and of itself is not remarkable. And some of his arguments of late have been pretty weak in my opinion.
But at least he understands the Constitution better than some of the sitting members of the SCOTUS.
Here's another opportunity for Obama to prove that he's learned from the mistakes he made in his first term. One of the biggest of those was his constant capitulation to Republicans on such issues as the Bush tax cuts and the debt limit.
Show some backbone, Barack. You have little to lose and much to gain.
Not for nothing, it was never about "backbone." The Bush tax cuts were a choice between throwing the baby out with the bathwater (the Earned Income Tax Credit, extension of unemployment benefits, etc.) or ending the standoff with the 'hostage' (the economic recovery) largely insulated from more harm. The debt ceiling was about keeping crazy Tea Partiers from ruining the nation's credit. And what did the Prez get for his efforts to shield the country from the massive economic damage the GOP was willing to inflict? Friendly fire about "backbone."
I never ceases to amaze me the stupidity of some people vote for GW Bush TWICE vote for Obama then in the mid-terms vote for a bunch of tea baggers then vote for Obama again and don't give him the congress to go along with him. FOX Limbaugh O'Reilley need to be removed permanently that or make it so doorknobs & doormats can't vote!
2010 was a fluke (IMHO) for several reasons. The tea party invigorated the worn out GOP, and the dems were feeling a bit too secure.
There is also the issue of staggared terms.
However, the gerrymandering going on in GOP states has really crippled the ability of the voters, but they really tried in this election (with some success).
We will have to wait until 2014 and the dems will need to push harder than they ever have at a mid-term election.
The Tee Potty is just the GOP on steroids and they haven't changed much just the package. They know they can't win another election unless they can gather more votes from minorities and they have already started on 2016 as you see now Republican Governors crying out for change but is just to pander for support. I haven't heard any Teapublicans in Washington say a peep, gotta keep that base happy of brainwashed fools. They won't budge so we need protesters on the streets of Washington before its over the cliff.
The Tea-Party formed and was fueled from the pissed-off people over the health-care vote. Will be interesting to see where things sit in two years when some of the changes can be measured and graded. Will certainly be a national mid-term issue.
Somehow it all became about winning, and winning in their view, means that our society loses. These self-righteous clowns disgust me.
This isn't going to happen until people realize raising the debt ceiling doesn't mean giving the President carte blanche to borrow and spend more and more and more money, but rather means it is the US promising to pay back money that's already been borrowed. Until then, people (read: ignorant Republicans) will insist raising the debt ceiling only means the Democrats want to continue to spend and increase the deficit for all those programs for the undeserving 47%.
YES. It's amazing to me how any people see raising the debt ceiling as *Obama's* issue, instead of Congress' - or, as Geithner put it, routine housekeeping.
All spending must originate in the US House. ThePresident can't spend a dime without the house approving it.
That's kind of my point. People understand very little about how these things actually work. They point to Obama as the source of all problems whether he has actual control over them or not.
Just think about it - we now have to "child-proof" the country because the GOP remains committed to acting like a bunch of two-year-olds.
Or, we could let them go ahead and stick their fingers in an unprotected electrical outlet...
Great idea if one gets it they all get it. Because they are like dogs in heat! All stuck together!
Chekhov's Gun.
When it come the balancing the budget (If that what you want to call it?) who every makes a cut can fully expect to have their heads on the chopping block. But I don't see anyone who can and it seems they all have been nutured.
I know Obama will cut SSI Medicare pensions (except their own) but he wants the Teapublicans to make it part of a deal. Unless they won't budge on raising taxes on the wealthy. Obama is terrible when it come to dickering for a deal I hope he get some good coaching from Bill Clinton hell put him in the process so we can get this deal with the devil done and don't get screwed again by these ass holes who hold the gun to our head. Hell even if they shut down the government they still get paid!
I say LEAD by example they cut their wages and pay for their own health benefits and before they fly off for one of their many vacations they have to ask for a voucher and check if its needed and all who travels are also.
The first thing the Teapublicans did almost two years ago was to be in session for 6 days a month so I say just pay them for 6 days! Its far past time to bulldoze the stonewall and be done with it. I think if we can find out where these people are over Thanksgiving we knock on their doors and call them (if it was even possible) and let them know of our discontent.
The President should not let them leave until a deal is done. I for one wouldn't cry one tear if they couldn't go home for Thanksgiving (or where ever they go Bahamas?) I'm just sick a tired of all this sh!t. Its gotta END!
Unfortunately, the President does not have the power to demand that the Congress remain in session and get the work done. :(
Actually he does. The President has multiple ways under The Constitution to make Congress show up. Reid is likely to declare the Senate in recess and the House will undoubtedly declare that it is in session but not doing business. That can provoke the President to use his powers under Article 2 Section 3 to "adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper" which means he could do recess appointments with the Repubs not being able to say crap. That means they would have to talk with Reid to keep both chambers open and actually doing business over the holidays.
Or the President could take the less confrontational approach and just call this an extraordinary occasion and call a special session of Congress to last full time until New Years.
I personally like the President just sending Congress home every time they do their "we're in session but not open for business" nonsense. It'll make Boehner and the House actually work 5 days a week. None of this 6 days a month schedules he's been running.
i saw something about budget..did harry pass one?
Why would you care?
you are right DisgustedWithitAll...i wouldn't care...does not impact me.
Well, what I'm detecting is that you don't know anything about the budget process. Whatever.
If we DID default on the debt, Congress might borrow at very high interest rates or TRULY fire up the printing presses as conservatives accuse them of and pay cash for everything.
Quantitative easing has NOTHING on this little inflation chugger.
Inflation will hurt those who have money.
I find it plausible that Congress will not take the chance. Of course, if they can hurt the credit rating, T-bill interest rates might go up and who has more T-bills than anyone?
Step one: the President announces that he'll veto any budget or appropriation that doesn't have a debt-ceiling hike attached to cover the expenditures.
Why not? It might give us a few moments peace while the republicans are running around trying to find the next thing to get their panties in a wad about. Not that I'm complaining... the sooner they self-destruct, the better.
If they don't want to raise the debt cieling or pay off the bills (which is what they ought to focus on anyway), can We the People start calling them day and night, demanding our debt be paid? Maybe garnish their wages? Put liens on their property(s)? Sieze or freeze their bank accounts?
What a stupid reason to keep doing it! "We've always done it before..." In fact, there has been a long history of resistance to raising the debt ceiling including this quote from then Senator Obama:
Interesting how he was against it before he was for it, huh?
@Rob Don, the difference between then and now is that then-Senator Obama knew the difference between a protest vote and actually trashing the full faith and credit of the U.S. There was no unanimous House and Senate Democratic opposition that would have caused us to default, as has happened and as continues to happen with the GOP. The debt ceiling was always assured of being raised. Nuance, my friend, nuance.
So if Senator Obama had been the tie breaking vote, he would have voted to raise the debt ceiling? And since he said having to raise the debt ceiling (again) was a sign of leadership failure, he would admit he has failed as a leader himself in this area? And, given that there has always been on and off opposition to raising the debt ceiling, none of those opposed were really serious about opposing it?
June, your argument lacks logical support.
What a shame that we can not put the budget and all that stuff on auto pilot permanently and get rid of Congress. What a shame that we can not inact a flat tax on all income above thirty grand so the IRS can downsize and worry about those who hide their income rather than checking on all those loopholes and write offs.
That would cause less government unless of course the idiots in congress decide to start legislating morality and imposing church dogma upon us all.
The President can do whatever he wants, as can the Congress, even defy a Supreme Court order, if they have the political will. That's what "separate but equal" means. Harry Reid could force through a vote of 51 Senators at any time for any reason, again, if he had the political will. The only reason any of this stuff works is because we agree that it works, and the GOP has just about left the reservation these days. I say screw 'em, Obama should just declare that we no longer need to have Congress or the Supreme Court say anything about the debt ceiling, and do whatever he needs to do to make it so.
OOH, 2 of Steves favorite things: guns and the continued bankrupting of this country. Someone here please explain why a balanced budget is a bad thing. I have had one for 33 years and I don't owe anything to anybody. STOP SPENDING MONEY YOU DON"T HAVE !!!!!!!!!! How hard is that to figure out. If these morons in the congress and Senate raise our taxes, they will just spend more. I have already payed too much into social security and will never see a dime because these total A$$wipes couldn't keep their hands off of it.
Sure, get rid of the ceiling. We'll just keep borrowing until we hit a quadrillion and higher. Nobody will really do anything that will actually eliminate the deficits and debt. Even the fiscal cliff crap will maybe make a small dent on the current deficits (but there will still be deficits in the hundreds of Billions) and the debt will continue to rise. What a joke - and everyone seems to think there is nothing wrong with this path to massive, massive debt.