Obama Rejects Call to Use 14th Amendment to Fix U.S. Debt Fight

[Purveyor]

By Tom Schoenberg and Greg Farrell - Oct 9, 2013

President Barack Obama rejected calls for him to invoke the Constitution’s 14th Amendment to skirt Congressional approval for issuing new debt, as both political scholars and legal experts said such a crisis-aversion plan would be risky and potentially illegal.

“If you start having a situation in which there’s legal controversy about the U.S. Treasury’s authority to issue debt, the damage will have been done even if that were constitutional, because people wouldn’t be sure,” Obama said in a news conference with reporters yesterday. “It’d be tied up in litigation for a long time. That’s going to make people nervous.”

“There are no magic bullets here,” he said.

The president’s comments further dim the prospect that he could use what amounts to an 11th-hour emergency exit if the White House and Congress are unable to reach a deal to raise the debt ceiling by Oct. 17. His stance places the onus on Congress to strike a deal ending the week-old government shutdown and raising the debt limit, or else risk triggering a U.S. default and global financial crisis.

The rationale for such presidential authority has been pushed by some constitutional scholars who argue that a default on the country’s debt violates the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which states that the “validity of the public debt of the United States” authorized by law “shall not be questioned.”

more...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-09/obama-throws-cold-water-on-14th-amendment-to-fix-debt-fight.html

[joeybee12]

1. Booooooooo! nt

[geek tragedy]

2. The problem is that such measures wouldn't undo the damage done

there would still be a cloud of uncertainty and doubt over the US's willingness to pay its debts

[jeff47]

3. Well, yeah.

If Obama says "I've got a way around this", the Republicans will blather on right through the debt ceiling.

The only hope of the Republicans doing their job is to make them think they have to do their job.

[BluegrassStateBlues]

4. Places the blame squarely on Republicans. Good strategy.

[Enrique]

5. not everyone agrees with him

many credible people say that the 14th Amendment is a valid option.

So when Obama rules this out, he is choosing not to use this weapon. We've all heard the rhetoric about how extreme this GOP Congress is, how unprecedented their abuse of the system is. I happen to believe that's true, in which case in order to fight them you have to be willing to use every weapon that's available, even if it hasn't been done before. Obama is choosing to stick with conventional weapons. Another president might choose differently.

[Swede Atlanta]

6. Another mistake........

I love this President but he doesn't always make the best decisions.....

He should NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER publicly rule out ANY possible action.

He shot himself in the foot by saying that use of chemical weapons in Syria is a "trigger line". He should have said, "Syria may engage in certain actions that will trigger an American response. Those MIGHT include things such as the use of chemical weapons, etc.". That would have left him the option to do what he wanted. His "trigger line" statement was, if not backed up by action, a dumb decision.

[woolldog]

11. The point in ruling it out here....

is that it places much more pressure on the GOP: it gives them no out. They either raise the debt ceiling or there is a default.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. He did the right thing.

[PoliticAverse]

8. He has repeatedly in the past rejected the 14th amendment 'solution' (it came up

in the last debt limit fight).

[Stargazer09]

9. He can't say that he'd use it

Right now, he must stand firm and force Congress to do their jobs. If he starts talking about using the 14th Amendment, then he loses his position of strength.

[leftyohiolib]

10. it is his duty to use the 14th amendment

[Xyzse]

12. I think, I'll leave this alone for now.

Doesn't mean he wouldn't use it if push comes to shove.

I think it is more constitutional to use the 14th amendment than allow the US to default on debt. Now that is unconstitutional.

I won't worry till the 14th, so I have 5 days. Everything right now to me is posturing.

[Gothmog]

14. You are correct

President Obama may be forced to use Section 4 of the 14th Amendment but this will involve litigation and investors will charge a higher interest rate due to the risk

[Xyzse]

15. Yeah, that's one of the reasons I am iffy about the 14th Amendment

I just hope it actually isn't off the table on the 17th isn't it?

[IrishAyes]

18. Good advice.

[Gothmog]

13. From a legal and risk standpoint, President Obama is correct

The use of Section 4 of the 14th Amendment will involve litigation and risk to investors. Investors will demand a higher interest rate due to the risk that they are now being asked to assume. From a legal standpoint, President Obama is correct in that there are no cases on Section 4 of the 14th Amendment that are helpful and any litigation here will scare investors

[mindwalker_i]

16. I'd settle for some non-magic bullets

I kind of think this is the right course of action, although not for the reasons Obama gives. A confrontation is being forced between the Repubs and the rest, and we need to see it through rather than just sweeping the problem away. One party doens't want the U.S. to work any more. Taking away their lever allows them to keep working, finding other levers with which they can beat up the country.

[DonCoquixote]

17. Thre is another reason why he might not SAY he would do it

If you do not think Alec is cranking out the litigation papers already, I got a bridge to sell you. The GOP wants that impeachment trial, especially as they know they own the Supreme Court.