Biden Beclowns Himself On The Debt Limit
Why The 14th Amendment Has Nothing To Say About The Debt Limit
Show Notes Page For This Episode Of Legalese
Today On Legalese we are talking about the ridiculous arguments coming from Washington that suggest the debt limit is unconstitutional and that the 14th amendment authorizes the President to circumvent the Constitution and laws of the United States to pay off the US debts to avoid default.
The problematic nature of this argument should be obvious with the flippant and pedantic language that they are using when trying to justify doing something that has never been done in the 155 years of the 14th amendment’s existence. Like when Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), spoke out about this:
“I personally feel that we should test that and I think that the language is very explicit in that amendment,”
But if Dicky D. was really so confident Biden had the authority and the language was explicit, there would be no need to even address testing the constitutionality of this garbage argument.
Likewise there’s senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
“The 14th Amendment is not anyone’s first choice. The first choice is that the Republicans raise the debt ceiling because the United States government never, ever, ever, ever defaults on its legal obligations. But if Kevin McCarthy is going to push the United States over a cliff, then it becomes the president’s responsibility to find an alternative path,”
If Lizzy actually believed this is how the 14th amendment was meant to be used, why wouldn’t it be her first choice? I realize politicians in Washington tend to develop an allergy to the Constitution, where its mere mention causes them to breakout In lies and excuses, but anytime the Constitution actually does clearly support a politician’s claim they can’t wait to wrap themselves in genuine authority.
They don’t want to do this because they surely understand the bullshit inherent in their own argument. For one thing, that’s because failing to raise the limit of the debt-ceiling does not cause default. It causes the government to operate on a balanced budget until it reaches an agreement that allows them to steal even more future prosperity for the sake of continued present gluttony.
Though its understandable why a government who has made a decision to forgo all fiscal responsibility in perpetuity could be very nervous about the people coming to the potential realization that operating government on a balanced budget is a possibility…. After all, we might insist they continue to practice such fiscal responsibility. A truly terrifying thought for any politician whose career is built on outright bribery of the people through increased level of theft, inflationary money printing and borrowing large sums they very clearly never intend to pay back.
The problems with these arguments are the same problems we always seem to confront whenever we find someone claiming that every policy they like is constitutional and every policy they dislike is unconstitutional. The problem is that when politicians want to weaponize the Constitution they will cite it, but don’t quote it. This leads to people who insist that politician is correct about what the Constitution says. A decision they reach based entirely on their personal preference in favor of a particular policy. Which causes them to cite the Constitution, but not read it. This problem is never more true than when it comes to the 14th amendment.
The 14th Amendment
The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, soon after the Civil War. It’s the longest amendment ever adopted, because it addressed a multiplicity of issues. One reason for the amendment was to ensure that future Congresses, even if dominated by members from former Confederate states, would honor the Union Civil War debt.
The amendment has five sections. Sections 4 and 5 are relevant to our discussion. Here’s the pertinent language:
“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law … shall not be questioned …”
-Amendment XIV, § 4
“The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”
-Amendment XIV, § 5
Notice what this language says:
The validity of U.S. public debt shall not be questioned. This means that the federal government may not use any pretext for refusing to pay off debt instruments, such as savings bonds and treasury bills.
The amendment grants Congress power to pass laws to ensure our debt obligations are met.
Now notice what this language doesn’t say:
It doesn’t say the government must borrow more to pay off existing debt; Congress may meet its obligations from existing revenue.
It doesn’t say Congress must change legal limits on borrowing.
Although it grants power to Congress, it grants none to the president—other than to enforce the laws enacted by Congress. This is because the Constitution requires that the president “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” (Article II, § 3)
One of those laws the president must enforce is the national debt limit.
This Isn’t a Technicality
The principle is a central tenant of our government. All financial powers are lodged in a representative legislature rather than the executive.
Section 4 doesn't address default or other failures to honor terms of a debt contract. It bars repudiation. A debtor who is late on a payment isn't questioning the debt's validity; he is merely late on a payment. To my knowledge, no one on either side of the debate is suggesting that the U.S. repudiate its debt.
Further, even if one assumes the 14th Amendment bars debt defaults, it nowhere authorizes the president to take whatever measures he deems necessary to prevent default. It no more empowers him to take such measures than it does you or me. As per the Constitution, Congress, not the president, has the power to "borrow money on the credit of the United States." (Article I, § 8).
If the Constitution bars default and more money is needed to prevent default, Congress must act. The president can't issue debt on his own say-so.
Insofar as the 14th Amendment obligates the President to act to ensure that debts are paid, this would require the President to prioritize paying such obligations over making other appropriations.
If Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, the only reason there would be a default is if the executive fails to pay the interest on the debt as it comes due. But if the executive branch believes there is a constitutional requirement to pay the interest, why would it even consider refusing to do so? To my knowledge there is no law that prevents the executive from prioritizing interest payments above all other spending.
Not only does the President lack the authority to disregard the debt ceiling, he also lacks the constitutional authority to borrow funds without congressional authorization.
That we are seeing a number of Democrats, such as Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN 5th) and numerous other members of Congress saying that they intend to reject the compromise that seems to have been worked out in hopes of forcing Biden to act on the 14th Amendment as their PREFERRED resolution should be disconcerting to anyone concerned with a true exercise of constitutional government.
By which I mean government operating under the actual authority and limits of the Constitution. But it seems we now live in a Country where the majority of Americans prefer to redefine the notion of constitutional government so that “Constitutional” simply means “every policy I prefer”.
Carthago Delenda Est.
Tags: constitution, law, politics, fourteenth amendment, debt limit, debt ceiling, Section 4, 14th amendment, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Dick Durbin, Bernie Sanders, Ilhan Omar
"causes them to break out in lies & excuses"; I see what you did there...
Nice.