Geithner Spokesperson to Tribe: Hey, I Never Said I Would Use the Fourteenth Amendment to put the U.S. Deeper Into Debt!
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here. Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]
As I mentioned yesterday, Liberal Law Professor and generalized legal giant in the liberal community, Laurence Tribe published an Op-ed in the New York Times arguing that it would be unconstitutional (and stupid) of the President to ignore the debt ceiling and unilaterally place us even deeper into debt as some have suggested.
Well, today Treasury’s General Counsel George Madison sent a letter to the New York Times:
Contrary to Professor Laurence Tribe’s assertion (Op-Ed, July 8), Secretary Geithner has never argued that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution allows the President to disregard the statutory debt limit. As Professor Tribe notes, the Constitution explicitly places the borrowing authority with Congress, not the President.
The Secretary has cited the 14th Amendment’s command that “[t]he validity of the public debt of the United States… shall not be questioned” in support of his strong conviction that Congress has an obligation to ensure we are able to honor the obligations of the United States. Like every previous Secretary of the Treasury who has confronted the question, Secretary Geithner has always viewed the debt limit as a binding legal constraint that can only be raised by Congress.
So assuming that Madison is not going rogue or something, this means one of two things. Either Tribe misinterpreted Geithner’s remarks on the subject, or Tribe interpreted them correctly and Geithner is backing off.
Either way, it is an encouraging sign that Obama will not try to usurp Congress’ powers on this subject, too.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
it just means that Ear Leader will have to find a different way to justify doing whatever the hell it is that he wants to do, rather than what the law and the Constitution say he has to do…same as always.
wanna bet he has noted Constitutional scholar Rick Stengel on the case at this very moment?
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:02 pmIt’s tough when one of your own tells you how full of sh*t you are.
Icy Texan (73cea7) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:20 pmIcy ftw…
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:25 pmTimmy G’s been a disaster and is a tax cheat, but I’ve never considered him to be a hack. Tribe has always been a political hack operating under the guise of respectability.
Below,is the last paragraph of a NYT story on the debt limit:
==In addition to his warnings about the cost of a default, officials said, Mr. Geithner told the lawmakers the White House did not believe it had the authority, under the Constitution, to continue issuing debt if it reached the debt ceiling. Nobody in the room disputed Mr. Geithner’s bleak assessment, the officials said.==
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/us/politics/08fiscal.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
Timmy definitely has hung Mr. Tribe out to dry.
elissa (09dbe4) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:38 pmFor all the kicking and screaming over the debt ceiling, and indeed, it is a damn serious card to play, why haven’t the democrats given the GOP huge concessions in exchange for a debt ceiling adjustment?
They act like it’s a huge problem, and then just barrel along towards the problem, daring the GOP to play their only card left.
Thanks for that link, Elissa. If the House and Senate pass Paul Ryan’s budget next week, and ask for a debt ceiling easing under Obama’s 2006 terms (fix the problem first), everyone wins. Even the democrats win, as the economy would probably be roaring by election day.
These are some damn stubborn democrats. It’s absurd that Reid would even consider passing a Republican budget. Just because.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:43 pmDustin, the Democrats think that a default by the US that can be blamed on the GOP is their only hope of retaining the White House in 2012.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:46 pmYou’re right, SPQR. It is simply hard for me to understand that degree of cynicism.
I stopped trying to understand these people when they went out of their way to deny soldiers their pay if a shutdown occurred. Even today, their hysterical description of what happens if the government runs out of money seems geared towards making the situation much worse.
They keep upping the stakes, like a poker player with a bad hand, playing a guy who doesn’t seem confident. And why would the GOP be confident? If the US Government doesn’t pay her debt (if we have the most cynical possible reaction from the White House) it will lead to such a disaster. I realize I don’t even need to explain that.
These guys are unbelievable.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:54 pmDemocrats know they’re going to lose the next election, big time, unless they can get the Stupid Party to sign onto a tax increase. Then Dems hold the White House and the Senate, and Uncle Sam goes belly up.
ropelight (4d0efb) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:54 pmI think the filter ate my comment. No worries. SPQR, that is such a cynical strategy I would never believe it had I not been paying attention lately. The denial of soldier pay if a shutdown occurs, the flip flop on war powers, fast and furious…
Yeah, I guess you’re right. They will either try to create a disaster to blame the GOP for, or like Ropelight says, they will hope the GOP caves, ruining their electability.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:56 pmthese are not the sorts of problems non-loser little countries have
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/9/2011 @ 5:58 pmHow nice to see an exception.
Dianna (f12db5) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:06 pmDustin, its clear that they want a shutdown if not an actual default.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:07 pmSPQR
Yeah demcrats are forgetting that Newt isnt there for a lightening rod and unemployment was what 5 pts lower?
Stupid democrats
EricPWJohnson (2921b6) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:14 pmSPQR, I keep hoping this is all an act… a poker face. Surely they aren’t insane. Surely they realize they can compromise. Why would they simultaneously increase the panic should a shutdown occur and act as though they are 100% willing to go there if the GOP doesn’t simply lift the ceiling?
One possibility is that they really just think this situation would suit their political narrative against the GOP, and somehow they just don’t give a flip what the damage is to Americans.
And of course, those who read Rules for Radicals or are familiar with Cloward Piven will recognize that creating chaos and damage to our economy is not even a negative to some of these clowns.
We are living in very troubled times, and I simply pray we can hold on until 2012.
Dianna, while it would be a nice exception, I am sure you remember that Obama has sent a lot of signs out there he was delighted to reverse himself on. In a few weeks, he might say ‘of course I have the power to usurp Congress on this issue!’ Everything this White House says has an expiration date.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:14 pmAmericans don’t care about unemployment, EPWJ!
And BUSH!
Just kidding. While I sadly think SPQR is accurate in his views, I can’t understand why the dems would think they can get away with it.
I guess the real radicals just want to watch Rome burn, Cloward Piven style. But they must be living in quite a bubble if they think America won’t blame them. It’s clear we’re in the middle of a major shift in American politics, and if the democrats want to prove just how horrible their leadership can be, my cynical side is cheering them on. But damned if the rest of me isn’t hoping they don’t come to their senses before we face some kind of disaster.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/9/2011 @ 6:27 pmIf Tribe misunderstood Geithner, he’s in good company, because so did everybody else.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:01 pmI doubt the Dems will have a bad year in 2012. The result of the NY-26 special election should dispel that notion.
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:26 pmGerald
lol, you mean like it did in 2010?
Aaron Worthing (73a7ea) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:28 pmGerald, I think that depends partly on the economy and partly on who is nominated.
But we’d probably have won NY 26 but for the fake tea party candidate. Granted, I’m not disproving your point. Tricks will abound in 2012.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:29 pmThe shutdown in MN will be very instructive, and for the Dems in DC, highly informative – and disturbing,
AD-RtR/OS! (4b35a7) — 7/9/2011 @ 8:34 pmif it continues without any great demand by the public that the two sides come to a meeting of the minds.
Like the old 60’s saying, “What if they gave a war, and nobody came?”, we could possibly be witnessing in MN a shutdown that has minimal effect.
If that were to happen in DC, it would turn the Left’s world completely upside down, and inside out.
This would be the Left’s worst nightmare, and a rational Leftist (I know, counter-intuitive) would wish to avoid such a situation at all costs.
The last thing the Left wants to be forced to do is to prioritize the spending of OPM, for that would require them to be “judgemental”, which they are completely incapable of, by temperment and philosophy.
the reason they are backing is simple: A few in the GOP have said that it would bring ‘impeachment procedure against the president’. This had them scared, I believe!
cali (634360) — 7/9/2011 @ 9:33 pmGeithner must have told Obama that nobody would buy bonds not authorized by Congress. No matter what Tribe states, if the treasury tried to sell such bonds all Boehner would have to say is that Congress specifically will not honor them and hence no buyers.
cubanbob (409ac2) — 7/10/2011 @ 7:04 amObama would then once again look like the fool he is.
At Michelle Malkin’s site Doug Powers has a post about Warren Buffett’s CNBC interview:
Billionaire Obama supporter Warren Buffett weighed in about deficit reduction with a hypothetical plan:
“I could end the deficit in 5 minutes. You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP all sitting members of congress are ineligible for reelection.”
ropelight (78f846) — 7/10/2011 @ 8:47 am#16 and #17
2010 is ancient history. The Republicans were running against Obamacare and the lousy economy. They were not running on any concrete proposals of their own. Now there are some and they are easily demagogued. That’s what the Dem based her campaign on. As for the fake Tea Party candidate, if you add his vote to the Republican’s vote it would have been 52% in a heavily Republican district. The Republican got 68% of the vote in 2010. That’s a stunning dropoff even counting the 3rd party vote as Republican. What do you think will happen in a district where the Pubbie got 54% in 2010? Pat Caddell predicts Obama gets reelected and Pelosi will return to Speaker next year.
It amazes me how blase most Republicans are about NY-26. Apparently they are comforted by the 3rd party factor. Rush Limbaugh seems to take it for granted that Obama’s gone as long as the Republican is sufficiently conservative. I see this kind of thinking as a tad delusional like his apparent belief that Christine O’Donnell would sweep to victory in Delaware.
There are ways to deal with the demagoguing of the budget proposals, but they take some real effort and skill. Republicans have never demonstrated they are up to the task. The first step is to recognize what’s happening and start really focusing on countering it. Instead they are mostly ignoring it. If you had a heavily Democrat district that did what NY-26 did in reverse, it would be setting off all kinds of alarm bells with them.
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 7/10/2011 @ 12:04 pmThere is wisdom in GeraldA’s comment. He speaks from the head and the heart.
ropelight (a1fbb3) — 7/11/2011 @ 6:37 am