The old one two:

Thursday-July 7, 2011

The old one two:

Everyone in Washington is talking tough. Everyone in Washington is holding their ground, with regard to raising the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is the limit at which the government can borrow money.

On May 16, of this year, the United States hit it’s legal debt limit of $14.3 trillion. Unless that limit is raised, the Treasury will, on Aug. 2, be unable to pay its bills. It will have to either stop spending money on government programs or default on paying the nation’s creditors. This is the standard line, none of which is likely to happen.

The White House is trying to convince Congressional Republicans that the debt ceiling needs to be raised. The impasse is how to constrain the deficit’s rapid growth due to governmental spending. Meanwhile, some people have theorized that there’s a way to get around the debt limit.

Several law professors and Senators, even Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, have suggested that section 4 of the 14th Amendment, known as the public debt clause, might provide a silver bullet. This provision states that “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law ... shall not be questioned.” They argue that the public debt clause is sufficient to nullify the ceiling — or can be used to permit the president to borrow money without regard to the ceiling.

The Supreme Court has addressed the public debt clause only once, in 1935, in the case of Perry v. United States. The court observed only that the clause confirmed the “fundamental principle” that Congress may not “alter or destroy” debts already incurred.
Some have argued that this principle prohibits any government action that “jeopardizes” the validity of the public debt. By increasing the risk of default, they contend, any debt ceiling automatically violates the public debt clause.

This argument goes too far. It would mean that any budget deficit, tax cut or spending increase could be attacked on constitutional grounds, because each of those actions slightly increases the probability of default. Moreover, the argument is self-defeating. If it were correct, the absence of a debt ceiling could likewise be attacked as unconstitutional — after all, the greater the nation’s debt, the greater the difficulty of repaying it, and the higher the probability of default.
Both approaches provide the false hope of a legal answer that obviates the need for a real solution.

The Constitution grants only Congress — not the president — the power “to borrow money on the credit of the United States.” Nothing in the 14th Amendment or in any other Constitutional provision suggests that the president may usurp legislative power to prevent a violation of the Constitution. Moreover, it is well established that the president’s power drops to what Justice Robert H. Jackson called its “lowest ebb” when exercised against the express will of Congress.
Worse, the argument that the president may do whatever is necessary to avoid default has no logical stopping point. In theory, Congress could pay debts not only by borrowing more money, but also by exercising its powers to impose taxes, to coin money or to sell federal property. If the president could usurp the congressional power to borrow, what would stop him from taking over all these other powers, as well?

There comes a time when true leaders must say enough is enough. Yesterday, the title of the FORUM was “the responsible one”. I tried to put into words the intent Jefferson had when writing the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson was the responsible one who through his words illustrated the words of independence to a nation that was in need of a leader.

In short, today’s FORUM simply says that the Republicans should not give into the demands of the Democrats or the president. The Republicans should be saying that the Democrats demands are irrelevant, they are wrong for the times and that raising the debt ceiling will rob future generations of their wealth. The Republicans must start driving home the point that the president and the democrats and no one else are the ones that are responsible for the nation’s ills today. The president should be called down on his attempt to make this crisis political and on his attempt to walk away from the responsibility of his actions.

The president’s rhetoric about the tax breaks for corporate jets, as being the problem of why there is a debt crisis, is insane and is ludicrous. The president must be given the old one-two in the most American of ways. The president must be stopped and the Republicans must stand their ground and not give in to the demands of the Democrats. If the Republicans say no to raising the debt ceiling, the president will be forced to run the government on what the government takes in. What is so wrong with that?

The country will not default on making the payments or making the payments on the interest owed. The country might have to reduce the size of government so that the cost of entitlement spending is possible for the short term, what is so wrong with that?

The Democrats are talking about raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans as a way to create more revenue. It is a proven fact that raising taxes only hurts economic growth especially in a downward economic cycle. We need new jobs so that there are new tax payers contributing to the system so that we don’t have to borrow money to keep the entitlements afloat. The problem we have today is that we spend more than we bring in. The other part of the problem is that 48% of Americans don’t pay any tax at all. The question must be asked: who is responsible for that?

Until an argument can be made over the truth of our debt nothing will be done. Raising taxes and eliminating the depreciation on corporate jets alone will not solve the problem. Waging war on the middle class and initiating class warfare alone is not the way out of the dilemma that we find ourselves in.

The way out is having the Republicans stand their ground and give the opposition the old one-two punch. This consists of telling the truth and facing the facts and giving a reason why we should not rob our posterity for false prosperity today.

It offends me that the president thinks that he has a Constitutional right to borrow on the nation’s credit. If the forefathers thought this was true, then their words about liberty, freedom and independence would never have seen the light of day.

Gregory C. Dildilian
Founder and Executive Director
Pinecone Conservatives

A footnote: The old one-two punch is strictly an American thing. Giving the old one-two is what Washington continues to do to us. It’s time to reverse that trend!

Todays FORUM is dedicated to my good friend who just joined!