It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The President, the Congress, and the 14th Amendment

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
I just finished reading the 14th amendment, there being all this talk about the president possibly invoking it. For those to busy to find it, I repost the relevant sections.

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. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

The reason I bring this up is that I have a question as to what might be happening in the near future.
Simple hypothetical,

The speaker will show up tomorrow at 11:00 am as the President ordered. He will have a plan he can pass to raise the debt ceiling. That plan will cut the budget by more than the amount of the raise in the debt ceiling as well as cut spending on entitlement programs, and will not have any tax increases, (revenue enhancements to you dems.).

If the President balks at this plan or brings up invoking the 14th amendment what is to stop The Speaker from reminding the President of section 5 of that article and follow by saying the House was in the process of invoking the 14th amendment and would be passing a bill requiring the president to pay the debts and obligations of the federal government according to their wishes.(with in the framework of the article, i.e.: our debt obligations must be paid, but the rest is up for debate by the congress).

While I understand that the Senate is part of the Congress, and therefore must also pass this bill, It can be argued that The onus of invoking the 14th falls to the House as all bills involving revenue must be initiated in the House.

This then places the onus for not raising the debt ceiling on the Democratic Senate, and gives the Republicans a slim but arguable out.
Again I highlight the section.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

So what do you think>

edit on 7/22/2011 by Phedreus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2011 @ 08:57 PM
link   
No where in the Constitution does it that says that the President has power to borrow money, all money must originate in the House which is apportioned by population. The President is just an administrator of the laws, he cannot create them, even though they try through Executive Orders, which are generally clarifications of existing laws rather than making new law.



posted on Jul, 22 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   
all i can say where in the constitution does it say the government can steal money from the american public

social secuirty and other government pensions.

seems to me the 14th doesnt come into play since the debt incurred was not by legal means.

thats what i think anyway and im sticking to it.


funny how they quote law and break law all the time.
edit on 22-7-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Phedreus
 


First off, contrary to what the media circus and our corrupt politicians state, we will not default on out debt if the debt ceiling is not raised. We cannot defaut on the debt if we have income coming into the government coffers that is greater than the interest we pay on the debt, which it is. Our current debt expenses for 2011 can be found here:

www.treasurydirect.gov...

Essentially, we are slated to pay approximately 385 billion dollars through October.

In 2010, tax reciepts were roughly 2.2 Trillion dollars. (2.6 Trillion for 2011)

en.wikipedia.org...

So in a nut shell, the US takes in more than it owes in interest, so any default on our debts is simple negligence on the part our elected officials, our treasury office, and the taxpayer for continually electing these clowns to office.

The 14th Amendment guarantees the payment of the 385 billion dollars in interest, period, nothing more, nothing less. Right now 1/6 - 1/7 of the money that we bring in goes to just pay the interest on the debt. Continuation of this, is unsustainable. Especially when we as a nation have had budgets that are running close to the 4 Trillion dollar range.

If we dont raise the debt limit, cuts would need to come from social programs in order to pay the interest off with current receipts. Rougly, bringing down a 4 Trillion dollar budget to a 2.2 Trillion dollar budget (roughly speaking).

Now this is a damned if you do, damned if you dont situation. You have two different sides of the table here (okay, I am going off on a tangent here). Lets just say, you decide to raise tax receipts on the coporation, small business, and wealthy americans to maintain current spending. Guess what, you now have money being pulled from the economy and into a government where 20 cents on every dollar is wasted. On the other hand, if you reduce the budget from 4 Trillion dollar to a 2.2 Trillion to match receipts and meet the interest obligations, you now have 1.8 trillion dollars that is no longer moving into the economy.

I can ramble on this subject for hours, so I will put in my two cents and call it the night.



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ParanoidMike
reply to post by Phedreus
 


Now this is a damned if you do, damned if you dont situation. You have two different sides of the table here (okay, I am going off on a tangent here). Lets just say, you decide to raise tax receipts on the coporation, small business, and wealthy americans to maintain current spending. Guess what, you now have money being pulled from the economy and into a government where 20 cents on every dollar is wasted. On the other hand, if you reduce the budget from 4 Trillion dollar to a 2.2 Trillion to match receipts and meet the interest obligations, you now have 1.8 trillion dollars that is no longer moving into the economy.

I can ramble on this subject for hours, so I will put in my two cents and call it the night.



Pretty much sums it up. Worth more than two cents IMO.

I'm curious what was the last year the budget was at the $2.2t mark?



posted on Jul, 23 2011 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by rbnhd76
reply to post by Phedreus
 


Pretty much sums it up. Worth more than two cents IMO.

I'm curious what was the last year the budget was at the $2.2t mark?


Thanks, 2002 was the last time we were at the 2.2 Trillion mark on the general budget fund. Accounting gimmicks and intergovernment borrowing is not considered in this reply.



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join