GovTrack.usMay 23, 2023

As the United States heads toward running out of cash in a few weeks, here's a reminder how this happened:

* The law says what tax rates are, determining revenue.
* Each year laws are enacted that direct money to be spent a certain way.
* Existing debt has to be serviced (e.g. bonds).
* An older law limits national debt.
* Republicans drove up the debt during the Trump Admin (tax cuts, airline bailouts, etc) so that the limit is about to be reached.

The laws are logically incompatible.

Show threadPatrick McLaughlin

@GovTrack

But the constitutional obligation (his, Congress’s, SCOTUS’s, all of them…) not to put the debt in question—not to default—overrides all laws about debt. Because constitution.

So when Congress fails to pass a bill permitting that, it’s still obligatory, and the debt ceiling law becomes effectively an unconstitutional constraint on the obligation to see the debt serviced and the budgetary obligations (a passed by Congress and signed into law) fulfilled.

May 23, 2023 at 12:42pmWeb
Show threadGovTrack.usMay 23, 2023
@McPatrick Well, for one, people will disagree about what the Constitution means. But even if you're right about repaying debts, it doesn't say how to resolve the statutory paradox. Instead of tossing the debt ceiling, by the same logic the president could impose new taxes, or fire all federal employees --- from now until the end of time. I don't know if you want that power to be given to future presidents.
Show threadPatrick McLaughlinMay 24, 2023

@GovTrack
The law *cannot* force a condition the Constitution forbids. (This isn’t debatable, the history of that clause makes it very explicit that the debt may not be impaired or abandoned.)

So if/when that moment comes and there’s a conflict between law and constitution, the law loses.

We didn’t need a debt limit (only the US and Denmark have it; they don’t use it this way). There’s no crisis if/when it’s gone. Debt gets issued if needed, but the budget defines what *can* be spent.

Show threadPatrick McLaughlinMay 24, 2023

@GovTrack

And no, it’s *not* like those things. The Exec *has* the power already to issue debt. But doesn’t have authority to spend however it pleases — the budget constrains that already. And it’s how we functioned until the debt limit was created.

No crisis then. Wouldn’t be now.

Show threadAaronMay 25, 2023

@McPatrick
No one is questioning the validity of the public debt, which is not some fancy way of saying default. The question isn't "is the debt valid," but "should we issue more debt?" The 14th says nothing on this.

Even so, section 5 follows, empowering Congress, not the President, in carrying out the forgoing sections.

@GovTrack