Getty Images
Ordinarily, members of Congress, regardless of party or circumstances, don't like it when the White House -- any White House -- tries to circumvent lawmakers. The legislative and executive branches are co-equal, after all, and neither likes it when one tries to go around the other.
But as we inch closer to a debt-ceiling crisis, the entire Senate Democratic leadership has a message for President Obama: go around us. Greg Sargent reported this afternoon:
In a move that will significantly ratchet up the brinksmanship around the debt ceiling, the four members of the Senate Democratic leadership are privately telling the White House that they will give Obama full support if he opts for a unilateral solution to the debt ceiling crisis, a senior Senate Democratic leadership aide tells me.
The four Democratic leaders -- Senators Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Patty Murray -- have privately reached agreement that continued GOP intransigence on the debt ceiling means the White House needs the space to pursue options for raising it that don't involve Congress, and that the White House needs to know that Dems will support whatever it decides to do.
"In the event that Republicans make good on their threat by failing to act, or by moving unilaterally to pass a debt limit extension as part of an unbalanced or unreasonable legislation," they wrote, "we believe you must be willing to take any lawful steps to ensure that America does not break its promise and trigger a global economic crisis -- without Congressional approval, if necessary."
Note, the Democratic leadership didn't say how the White House should act unilaterally; just that it should act unilaterally if the need arises. There are alternatives, including the much-discussed trillion-dollar coin, which the president could conceivably choose from.
The legality of unilateral action remains tricky, which is why today's letter seems especially noteworthy -- if there was a legal fight between the branches, the entire leadership of the Senate majority is already prepared to side with the executive.
Why is this legally complex? Because we'd have what Dan Radmacher called "a conflict of law." On the one hand, the White House is obligated to follow the law that creates the debt ceiling. On the other hand, the White House is obligated to spend the money that Congress has appropriated.
On top of this, under the Constitution, the White House is also legally obligated to protect the full faith and credit of the United States, which congressional Republicans are apparently prepared to ignore.
If Republicans follow through on their threats, we'd have, among other things, an untenable legal dynamic: President Obama can't pay the government's bills, and he can't not pay the government's bills.
And so, for Sens. Reid, Schumer, Durbin, and Murray, the advice to Obama is pretty straightforward: do whatever you have to do and we'll back you up.
Update: I should also note that this should get the GOP's attention, too. If there's a crisis, Congress would not speak with one voice. It wouldn't be Congress vs. the White House; it'd be the White House vs. those who are holding the debt ceiling hostage, threatening to crash the economy on purpose unless their demands are met.
Second Update: Neil H. Buchanan, a law professor and economist at George Washington University Law School, and Michael C. Dorf, a Cornell University Law School professor and former law clerk for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, argue today that if/when push comes to shove, Obama will have a legal obligation to simply ignore the debt ceiling.
Leave a Comment:
Obama needs to show some Shrub Swagger: Mint the coin, call Congress into emergency session, whatever. As his predecessor said, "I won a mandate. I have political capital, and I intend to spend it."
Personally I'd love to see the global reaction to the coin idea.
Just think of it. Every county could declare some trinket represents trillions of dollars and all debt could be paid. After all, if you can mint a trillion dollar coin, why not mint 16 of them and pay off our debt, or send everyone a million dollars, or buy Canada? Easy peasy.
You do know the meaning of "fiat money", don't you?
Yes, money is whatever Govt declares it to be. What's your point?
While technically legal, the coin idea is just a bad idea. What will probably happen is that the President will take the 14th Amendment option. The GOP will be unable to get enough standing in both chambers to challenge him.
Shooter, like most Republicans, doesn't understand the issue. This isn't about spending levels. Nobody is suggesting using the $1 trillion platinum coin to buy anything or to pay off our debt. It's about giving the U. S. Treasury the authority to make good on the debts the Congress has already incurred. All the coin would do is eliminate the phony, destructive debate and the negative consequences that Republicans want to bring down on the country for (they think) their own political gain.
It's a silly solution. But, then again, it's a silly, manufactured problem.
Why is one coin any different than truckloads of paper?
Or for that matter, why is one piece of paper transferring a given amount of currency from the Mint to the Treasury, by electronic transmission for the exchange of the same dollar amount the coin is worth?
Obviously oblivious to how our Treasury’s monetary system works, the National Republican Congressional Committee mocks the legitimacy of the coin, saying that if the coin were to be issued, it would require enough platinum to sink the Titanic.
They must have come to that conclusion by listening to their media branch, Fox News, who claimed that the coin would have to weigh 17,773,995 tons, which, as they note, is equal to the weight of 89 blue whales or a ballistic missile submarine.
But Fox, aong with the NRCC seems to be misunderstanding a key premise of the solution: Minting a trillion-dollar coin doesn't require $1 trillion worth of platinum. Duh...
Business Insider's Joe Weisenthal and Economist Paul Krugman ask “How can something so "silly be so important?” It’s only “silly” if you just don’t “get it...”
Like the Republicans, and of course, Fox News.
??? The first sentence say you aren't going to spend the trillion dollars, then the second sentence says you will. Well which is it? If you are paying off local suppliers, you're spending.
If this were a household you'd be kiting checks to the electric company department store, and cable. Saying those bills have already been incurred doesn't make counterfeiting currency in your basement ethical. This is exactly what the trillion dollar coin does. It bypasses the Fed, the only legal source of dollars for the US.
As to your point about spending already agreed to, so what? Congress has made promises it can't keep, they'll have to deal with that. As they should. In fact Congress is so irresponsible, only the threat of not extending any more credit will curtail spending in the future. It's what one does to the irresponsible.
This is what should have happened the last time!
With all of the extended powers that Bush took, that Obama has continued to use, it is amazing to me that he is so tentative about these sorts of things.
"This is what should have happened the last time!"
this is correct and sadly it didn't which put the President in a bind. but good to see this, cause i am willing to bet that Nancy and company will do the same as well.
My thoughts exactly. We can only hope he stays the course.
Bargaining with the republicans last year (2011?) was a huge mistake because a) he gave away the store for no gain and [the main reason] b) the debt ceiling should not be used as a bargaining tool by anyone - ever! They either raise it or not, but no dickering, no bribing with the threat of not raising it.
In this political basketball play-off, the offense needs to pass to the best player, set a screen, and listen for the swish.
Swish!
It's even starker who this is against. Consider that all Boehner has to do is get approx. 20 Republicans and the debt ceiling could be raised in the House.
Why the secrecy? Why not stand up for your position in public as an elected official? Twenty or so in the House signed a letter supporting it. Why "privately" telling the White House.
I read a book called Integrity by Stephen Carter a long time ago and he said the three components of acting with integrity are: 1) Discern the right thing, 2) Act on the right thing, and the last component has to be present 3) Willingly say you acted and why. It's like believing the tax code is wrong, not paying your taxes, but not telling anyone you are not paying the tax or why. You can't do the first two without the the third and say you are acting with integrity.
I should have linked Professor Carter and his book...sorry. Interesting person, interesting read.
Sounds like they did all those things. Sometimes a private letter is the right thing to do, and sometimes leaking a private letter is as well.
Fr33d0m, I definately see your point. The only condition I would add is if when asked, they would say they support or agree with a unilateral decision. If they "hem" and "haw" then I would disgree. Thanks...
The best thing that could happen is for the debt ceiling idea to be ruined forever and made unconstitutional. Go 14th.
Please
"Why not stand up for your position in public as an elected official? "
LOL, they are now.
"Twenty or so in the House signed a letter supporting it. Why "privately" telling the White House."
smiling how private was it if you know about it? and seems to be out in the open now.
they have been hinting at this for a while now. some have blinders on and dont want to see, others have a hard time reading though those little windows installed in their navels, cause their head has been stuck in their 4th point of contacts which also makes it hard to hear as well.
Pilot, seems like you made the same point as (before) Fr33d0m. As I wrote, you definitely have a point. If they want admit it in public though, it's playing games not integrity (IMHO). But, point taken.
as long as you give that same integrity complain to McConnell cantor beohner the ones who behind close doors consorted to take down the president which means america.
so there is not a lot integrity for the con`s./teapublicans.
the rondon party do not hold their gop accountable , I believe it is writen in their platform lol
Did everyones pay check get smaller like mine did this week?
LEAN FORWARD America this will only hurt a little bit.
That's because the payroll tax cut expired. That tax cut, part of the stimulus, was only temporary, and actually was extended beyond the date originally set for it to end.
Teabaggers in a nutshell: Why should we have to pay for anything?
nope i didnt.
i even got a pay raise first one in 4 years.
which off set (my retirement fund smiles SS) which even it didn't i would not care as like i said its going for my future.
Go Republicans! Thank you!
Bravo to Harry Reid and company! Stand with the president, and give him whatever room he needs to maneuver around this stupid law and the stupid Republicans who want to use it against the people!
Why is it so difficult to post a comment here? What happened to disqus?
Disqus isn't the system here, but you have apparently managed to figure that out.
They tried disqus at one point, but only briefly - a few hours?
Would it be so horrible to let Simpson and Bowles or Biden and Mcconell take the 1.2 tril(that the not so super comittee deadlocked on--hence its present insane structure) plus another 500-bil-800 bil in cuts over 10 years and put them into actual effect? followed then by another 500bil to a tril in revenue through any combination of a deduction cap tax reform or corp tax reform?
It isn't actually the cuts...it's what the GOP WANTS to cut. In 2008 they crashed the economy. They obstructed meaningful reform and taxes for 4 years. NOW they are threatening to crash the economy AGAIN if it isn't SS (which doesn't actually have to DO with the debt) and medicare. They will not close a loophole. 500+ days ago they whined and sniveled and voted on the sequester. They did nothing about it and NOW they are whining and sniveling about being held to their word. Yes it would be that horrible.
@Mego... huh?
You do remember that the Dems were in control of both houses of congress then... right? You do remember the collapse of the housing bubble... Barney Frank... Frannie and Freddie?
Actually, I don't remember that. I remember the Republicans trying to protect Wall Street at all costs - including 10s of thousands right out of my pocket.
Your point?
the dems took the house in 2006, the senate was split 50/50 , and the gop had the presidency
so the gop deregulated everything for 6 years , which ended up tanking the economy , but according to the troll here , the dem house tanked the economy all by its self , in just 2 years ...FLOP!!!!
and these trolls are offended if you call them idiots ?
Lisafp, that's a very interesting interpretation of what happened in 2008. Whether Dems or the GOP were in the majority in Congress for the two years prior, it was not government spending that caused the crash. I thought you've claimed in the past to be a sophisticated business owner, and you should know better than that. I think I smell a troll.
The 2008 crash was largely the result of highly inflated property values and a poorly regulated mortgage market.
That's a really condensed version, and I would suggest you spend some time in research to more fully grasp the motivating factors. But just note that Alan Greenspan--originally Mr. Free Market Capitalist himself--came to understand through this debacle that some degree of regulation and transparency of markets was absolutely essential to the health of the US and world economy.
It was not President Obama or a Democratic Congress that caused the recession, no matter what Matt Drudge claims.
Honest to GOD, I've been waiting for this day!!! GO DEMS!
it feels like, to me, that the republican led congress is punishing the american people for electing a black liberal president.
@William
That is just insulting... stop playing the race card. If I have different political beliefs from our president... that has nothing to do with the color of his skin...
Insulting to whom? I've talked to scores of Republicans since the elections and that really does seem to be the bottom line.
I am glad that you are the Exceptional Republican who is not a crypto-racist.
Thank you!
Would these Republicans also hate Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain, and Tim Scott? Of course not. Go be racist somewhere else.
Sadly, we are now seeing what the Romans saw: Caesar was hailed as a reformer and a savior when he overthrew the dysfunctional Senate. The Republicans are doing this to us - the exact thing they claim to stand against.
I would like to know who we "owe" $16 trillion to? Is it Bain, Paris Hilton and the Koch brothers? If so maybe they could afford to negotiate this debt..
Amazingly enough, we own most of the debt. Google US debt and click on images. It is not China which is the talking point.
Truefiction,
Here is a pretty good breakdown. About 30% is tied up in various retirement funds including SS. While not specifically mentioned in the article, around 35% of the total debt is held by foreign governments and investors of which China holds about 8% of the total debt.
http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/f/Who-Owns-US-National-Debt.htm
Not to worry fiction, none of it will ever be paid back. Any bonds redeemed are done so with borrowed/printed money.
Thanks for the link, Steve. I should make clear that the phrase "conflict of law" was James Taranto's originally, but it got me thinking about the fact that, yes, this is just a conflict of laws, and wondering why the most disruptive and damaging law ought to win the conflict.
Ah. So you DON'T understand.
No surprise, I guess.
Have a nice day!
(This response was intended for ShootingBlanks. No surprise, I guess, that it really. simply. Has No Clue.)
Feel free to offer your version...
So pass the damn filibuster reform and then pass whatever needed to help the Prez out.
A fair fight, yes, but nobody gets bypassed, circumvented or nullified. That's not how to run the government. Nor can we run it long with arm-twisting, expediency and gimmicks. Governing is hard work and we'll just have to work through it. There are no easy roads to governing, just as there are no easy roads to learning. And for the same reason: Governing requires effort -- not only to understand what needs to be done -- but also effort to understand the other side.
The platinum coin is a gimmick. I trust that the President, a a former Constitutonal Law Professor would use the 14th ammendment that states that the debt of the USA will not be questioned. One would expect the House to impeach him if he does this, but that will go no where in the Senate. Seems like the Presidents choice comes down to let the Republicans throw the world economy into the trashcan or take the meaningless impeachment.
In the oath of office, there is a clause to defend against enemies foreign and domestic. If the actions of the Tea Party types do nor reach the level of domestic enemies, then it appears that only armed insurection would qualify
Section 5 of the 14th Amendment...the CONGRESS shall have the power to enforce...no use of the word President....
just saying...
Dangerous Territory
Next thing you know a Republican President will approve with executive authority mandatory guns for all!
Well...if the government can decide that everyone must have healthcare, which isn't mentioned in the constitution, it probably can decide that everyone must have a gun.
just saying...
A constitutional law professor should know that colusion and treason are illegal.
So true inspector12--- This constitutional law professor should know this is illegal which is why he threatens. He does believe he is a King. And those who voted for him already have their paychecks lowered the past two weeks and every 2 weeks hereon. Either way this country is doomed because our debt limit is too high, and will continue until we start over. The final conclusion Economics 101 will take over all of our spending ways. You think 2008 was bad... We ain't seen nothin' yet.
This country is so over. All of the "so called" economists know that the end is coming. They all know the date when the US will no longer be able to borrow money. They only want to keep us going to bleed this country dry. Democrats and Republicans alike all play the game with Chinese Theater in Washington every day. They are all just stick puppets behind a curtain. This government speaks to the lowest common denominator in our society with buzz words and catch phrases. Ask anyone on the street if they even know who any public official is, who Rachel Maddow is, who or what anything in government is. They can't tell you. They know what the latest YouTube video is. They can tell you about the cool app for their phone. They don't care about Washington or politics. They are the perfect lemmings for this government. Besides, didn't Romney murder that man's wife because he took away his job\healthcare\life for selling that company? That makes him a murderer, right?
Rachel, ask anyone who grew up in Russia during the time of the Soviet Union. This country will turn from the USA to the USSR overnight and many people will applaud the change. Hollywood will say "Yea for the communists" (as long as they can remain in the elite crowd). The United Socialists States of America. Has a nice ring to it, don't you think? Oh BTW, the first thing the Soviets did was to outlaw gun ownership. Just another check-mark on our new dictator's list (by executive order, of course)