• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Default averted? Announcement to be made at noon

Big whoop.. IF the Senate comes up with a deal, IF the GOP lead House agrees and passes it and IF the President decides to actually sign it, THEN most of you can probably celebrate, though I will not be celebrating.
 
I can't believe they let it work. The Tea Party just kept asking for more, and more, and more, and more, and the Democrats finally caved in and let them have everything just to get them to stop. By this time tomorrow we'll live in a country where women don't have the right to vote, slavery is reenacted, and it will be the official religion of the United States that Jesus was a white American of European descent who spoke English and praised the innate holiness of the wealthy.

Oh, wait, I think I got something backwards.
 
Deal announced:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics-live/liveblog/live-updates-the-shutdown-9/

Reid announces deal

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), speaking on the Senate floor, struck a triumphant note as he announced a bipartisan deal with Senate Republicans.

“In the end, political adversaries set aside their disagreements to prevent that disaster,” Reid said of a potential government default.

Reid said the plan will appoint conferees to a budget conference committee, led by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Parry Murray (D-Wash.) and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).

Reid also confirmed the government would be funded through Jan. 15 and the debt ceiling would be lifted until Feb. 7.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he is “confident” the plan will pass in both chambers of Congress. The House remains the biggest stumbling block for the bill, and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has not committed to allowing a vote on the Senate plan.

Reid said the Senate will change its ways following the current budget mess.

“Sen. McConnell and I have sat in very, very serious discussions the last few days,” Reid said. “We’re going to do everything we can to change the atmosphere in the Senate and accomplish things that need to be done for our country.”
Click to expand...
 
Heh I have to admit this time around they almost had me believing they wouldnt raise the debt ceiling. Ill read about how much of the can they are kicking down the road in a bit.
 
Jaskalas said:
No chance of default because per the 14th amendment no law of Congress may stop the President from servicing the debt. Congress does not have the power, if we "default" then that would solely be the President's choice and responsibility.
Click to expand...

Yikes. There is no legal precedent for it happening, the lawsuits and ramifications of simply paying interest and being late on other payments is legally complex. Stop pretending the 14th Amendment would have been some easy legal decision.
 
Genx87 said:
Heh I have to admit this time around they almost had me believing they wouldnt raise the debt ceiling. Ill read about how much of the can they are kicking down the road in a bit.
Click to expand...

This still hinges on the house. If Boehner fucks this up by not allowing it to come up for a vote, he (and the rest of the house leadership) should be arrested and charged with treason.
I'm dead serious.
 
Jaskalas said:
No chance of default because per the 14th amendment no law of Congress may stop the President from servicing the debt. Congress does not have the power, if we "default" then that would solely be the President's choice and responsibility.
Click to expand...

Quoting the relevant parts...

Section 4. 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.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Click to expand...

So where do you get the idea that "no law of Congress may stop the President from servicing the debt."? The law as I read it explicitly states that servicing the debt is exclusively congress' obligation.
 
Jaskalas said:
No chance of default because per the 14th amendment no law of Congress may stop the President from servicing the debt. Congress does not have the power, if we "default" then that would solely be the President's choice and responsibility.
Click to expand...

Krugman had a column on this, and his opinion was that the President would be breaking the law whether he did nothing (and ran afoul of the 14th amendment) or ordered the debt ceiling to be raised (and thus encroached on the Legislative branch's powers). But it seemed pretty clear to me that the President was not going to invoke the 14th.
 
First said:
Yikes. There is no legal precedent for it happening, the lawsuits and ramifications of simply paying interest and being late on other payments is legally complex. Stop pretending the 14th Amendment would have been some easy legal decision.
Click to expand...

The President would simply instruct his administration to continue servicing the debt. Anyone wanting to take him to court may, but the Constitution would hand them their ass.

The validity of the public debt of the United States [...] shall not be questioned.
Click to expand...
 
laspariahs said:
Depends it the house agrees.
Click to expand...

Well, first this has to get voted on in the Senate. And we may get some delaying tactics from Cruz.

The 17th is just the (estimated) day that the U.S. will have maxed out on its big credit card. But it's almost certainly not the day we'll default on payments, as we do have cash on hand now, and more money coming in.
 
Last edited:
Fayd said:
Quoting the relevant parts...

So where do you get the idea that "no law of Congress may stop the President from servicing the debt."? The law as I read it explicitly states that servicing the debt is exclusively congress' obligation.
Click to expand...

Because Constitution trumps law. The public debt shall not be questioned.

From this I derive that Congress cannot interfere with servicing the debt. Thus the "debt limit" is nothing more than the prohibition of issuing new debt. It's a budget battle, not a "default on your debt" battle.
 
shira said:
Well, first this has to get voted on in the Senate. And we may get some delaying tactics from Cruz.

The 17th is just the last day that the treasury can continue to borrow money. But it's almost certainly not the day we'll default on payments, as we do have cash on hand now, and more money coming in.
Click to expand...

Considering China has said the 17th is the day, it's the day. Everyone can keep servicing all the debt they want, if the people who own the debt are unhappy, we will be unhappy, in a nutshell.
 
Jaskalas said:
The President would simply instruct his administration to continue servicing the debt. Anyone wanting to take him to court may, but the Constitution would hand them their ass.
Click to expand...

You're not particularly bright or nuanced. It is well known in legal circles that the lack of precedent and lawsuits alone would be extremely legally perilous to the validity of raising the debt ceiling by simple Presidential fiat, to say nothing of the worldwide market reaction to the US being late on any debt principal payments of any kind. It's ignorant to suggest otherwise.
 
Sen. McCain said there will be more crisis’s to come, and this is not the end of it. So I guess we can expect shit to come up again in January.
 
Jaskalas said:
Because Constitution trumps law. The public debt shall not be questioned.
Click to expand...

Dumbest statement of the century. The Constitution is law. I'm not sure you understand how our legal system works.

From this I derive that Congress cannot interfere with servicing the debt. Thus the "debt limit" is nothing more than the prohibition of issuing new debt. It's a budget battle, not a "default on your debt" battle.
Click to expand...

No, false. The debt limit is about paying prior debts.

Fact: not paying principal is a technical default, even if you're paying interest. Deal with that reality however you like, but no bullshit about the 14th Amendment will change that.
 
Last edited:
spacejamz said:
Wonder how far they kicked the can down the road this time?
Click to expand...

Do you mean regrading the debt ceiling? Or do you mean regarding the budget?


Part of the compromise is that it changes how the debt ceiling is raised. There won't be any more battles over the debt ceiling. Congress can vote to disapprove a debt ceiling incrase but Obama can veto it. Basically, as long as the Pres wants the debt ceiling to be increased, it will be.
 
The announcement indicates the shutdown will continue but not at what spending level. The 2014 round of sequester cuts weren't mentioned as being included as part of the deal either, so it would seem those were left in place. So the agreement would seem to lock in (by inaction) the FY2014 sequester cuts of $54.7B to non-defense discretionary spending, or about 7.2%. The sequester cuts could of course be modified in the next couple of months, but the default is they'll happen unless an agreement is concluded to the contrary. And we get to have the debt ceiling conversation again in a couple months.


http://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/2013/06/guide-2014-sequester
 
Jaskalas said:
Because Constitution trumps law. The public debt shall not be questioned.
Click to expand...
First said:
Dumbest statement of the century. The Constitution is law. I'm not sure you understand how our legal system works.
Click to expand...

I make a simple statement in what you quoted. Constitution > anything Congress can do short of a new Constitutional Amendment. Do you dare refute that?

Check your emotions before spouting such rubbish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top