The Spectacle Blog
Bill Clinton, Peronist or pragmatist? From Politico’s Morning Money:
FLASH: CLINTON WOULD INVOKE THE 14TH - Former President Bill Clinton told National Memo’s Joe Conason last night that if he were still in office and all else failed he would invoke the 14th Amendment and raise the nation’s debt ceiling unilaterally to avoid default and then “force the courts to stop me.” http://bit.ly/p0R6Ug
His reasoning? “I think the Constitution is clear and I think this idea that the Congress gets to vote twice on whether to pay for [expenditures] it has appropriated is crazy.” This echoes a view from the New Republic which patly suggests that once Congress decides to spend the money, the president’s duty is merely to borrow.
Not really. The 14th Amendment doesn’t call for Congress to borrow whenever it needs money. It simply instructs Congress to pay for what it spends. Meaning it can choose to cut spending, raise taxes, or print more currency. Arguing as Clinton does would also license the president to print more currency in order to pay the bills, effectively running down the value of the dollar.
It’s like saying that once you’ve maxed out all your credit cards, you have no choice but to transfer the balance to a new credit card.
View all comments (8) | Leave a comment
Related Blog Posts
More Blog Posts by J.P. Freire
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/07/19/bill-clinton-on-debt-limit-id
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
bluecollarbytes| 7.19.11 @ 8:34AM
I think the evidence shows that Bill Clinton would have already triangulated by now, trying to take credit for some spending reductions forced on him by Republicans. Besides, he would be to busy with court proceedings into his lies.
Clinton would have also taken out bin Laden if only he'd had the opportunity.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.19.11 @ 10:11AM
Clinton thought he could get away with anything, including lying to a federal Grand Jury. Was he wrong? Hillary lied to a federal Grand Jury and got away with it. What's the point? These provocateurs will try or do anything until someone uses the law to stop them.
martin j smith| 7.19.11 @ 10:23AM
I think this illustrates what we are up against in the agregate politically. A group of people who do not give a damn about laws and do what they want. And We have the responsibility to resolve the debt crisis. Thus as I have said: Obama where is your beef ?
Demand the Socialists plan !!!!!!!!!!!!!
MTB| 7.19.11 @ 10:26AM
I doubt very much that is what he'd do. That being said, thank goodness he's no longe in office. Now if we can just get him and his wife to go away and never be heard from, again. I didn't like him then, I don't like him now.
bobmontgomery| 7.19.11 @ 10:49AM
Doesn't Clinton's "I'd force the courts to stop me" routine sound an awful lot like the one from Ed Schulz of MSNBC who said he would lie, cheat and steal and pull the Democrat lever in the voting booth as many times as he could get away with it?
DataShade| 7.19.11 @ 11:13AM
Uh, ignoring the provocative nature of "I'd force the courts," doesn't he have a point - should Congress get to vote once to pass an appropriation bill, then refuse to pay for it? At what point do we as a people say we've had enough of forked-tongue trickery from Congress and force them to actually think about their actions ahead of time?
Besides, what probably ought to scare you about the attitude, "I'd force the courts to stop me" is that it's just a short skip away from Andrew Jackson's retort to the Supreme Court's attempt to stop the Trail of Tears, where Jackson basically asked "how do you intend to force me to stop?"
Scott| 7.19.11 @ 11:48AM
Apparently he enjoyed the impeachment process so much that he'd be willing to go through it again.
john dubose| 7.30.11 @ 9:39PM
The framers of the constitution did not want to see the policies of the federal government turn on
one election. That is why only 1/3 of the senate is up at any one time. The Dems retain MORE cumulative authority than the Reps. Conservatives have to yield to that fact, make a not so satisfying deal and finish the job of winning offices next year.
If it hits the fan, Obama will have to do what Clinton suggested.