{"id":5247,"date":"2011-06-29T02:22:03","date_gmt":"2011-06-29T09:22:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=5247"},"modified":"2011-06-29T02:22:03","modified_gmt":"2011-06-29T09:22:03","slug":"is-the-debt-ceiling-unconstitutional","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2011\/06\/29\/is-the-debt-ceiling-unconstitutional\/","title":{"rendered":"Is the Debt Ceiling Unconstitutional?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Senate Democrats are proposing that the terrorist Republican blackmail, holding the good faith and credit of the United States hostage to their demands to legalize more class warfare against the the American people, violates the US Constitution.  On further study, I agree.  While there is no evidence that this notion has gained traction in the White House, it could rightly be used to defang the Republican Party over the debt ceiling.<\/font><\/p>\n

First, here is the excerpt from the 14th Amendment in question:<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

Section 4<\/strong>. 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.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <Wikipedia<\/a>><\/p>\n

That appears self-evident to me.  <\/font>Here\u2019s more from Ryan Grim.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\"29constitution\"Growing increasingly pessimistic about the prospects for a deal that would raise the debt ceiling, Democratic senators are revisiting a solution to the crisis that rests on a simple proposition: The debt ceiling itself is unconstitutional<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law… shall not be questioned," reads the 14th Amendment.<\/p>\n

"This is an issue that’s been raised in some private debate between senators as to whether in fact we can default, or whether that provision of the Constitution can be held up as preventing default," Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), an attorney, told The Huffington Post Tuesday. "I don’t think, as of a couple weeks ago, when this was first raised, it was seen as a pressing option. But I’ll tell you that it’s going to get a pretty strong second look as a way of saying, ‘Is there some way to save us from ourselves?’"<\/p>\n

By declaring the debt ceiling unconstitutional, the White House could continue to meet its financial obligations, leaving Tea Party-backed Republicans in the difficult position of arguing against the plain wording of the Constitution<\/strong>. Bipartisan negotiators are debating the size of the cuts, now in the trillions, that will come along with raising the debt ceiling\u2026 [emphasis added<\/em>]<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <Huffington Post<\/a>><\/p>\n

Last night on Countdown<\/a>,  Keith Olbermann covered this in detail. <\/font>In the first segment Keith interviews Ryan Grim, the author of the above article.<\/font><\/p>\n