Obama to bypass Congress on default issue?

Opening Statement:

If Obama isn’t careful, he might hand the GOP the means to make the 2012 election a very tight race indeed. The means? Impeachment by the House.

The Impeachment of Barack Obama

Obama might decide to increase the debt limit without Congressional approval. I will cover some of the pros and cons on the rationale he’d use. But first, a brief description of how his impeachment might proceed:

·       Obama orders his Treasury Secretary to print and sell more bonds, thereby effectively increasing the debt ceiling without Congressional approval.

·       The GOP huffs and puffs, but proves it can do more.

·       Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, herself a candidate for president, will submit paperwork for the House to impeach the President.

·       The House, dominated by the GOP, will impeach Obama.

·       The Senate, dominated by the President’s party, will conduct the impeachment trial.

·       The Senate will acquit Obama.

Now, you might well ask, what would the GOP have to gain by impeaching, knowing full well the Senate will acquit? First of all, don’t be too sure the Senate will acquit. Every Senator voting “innocent” will find himself in the crosshairs of an angry GOP seeking to punish him.

Second, the House will drag out the impeachment proceedings to be sure to give maximum exposure to President Obama’s overreach. This will fire up the GOP base of activists and breathe life into the GOP primaries. Even the President’s once ardent supporters among the young and the left will be hard put to defend his actions. Even Democratic congressmen will squirm while being interviewed by a media smelling blood in the water.

It’s very hard to get an impeachment ball rolling. But if Obama were to be stupid enough to bypass Congress on the debt limit issue, he’d be handing the GOP a weapon which it could not resist using. If nothing else, the GOP would have a field day slaughtering (at the ballot box) those Democratic House members who would vote against impeachment.

Why Obama might bypass the Congress:

For decades, every time the US government was about to exceed its borrowing capacity, Congress and the President legislated to increase the debt limit. For decades…which is why I found the following to be disturbing:

QUOTE:

Delaware Sen. Chris Coons …[is] part of a group of lawmakers now examining whether, in the case that debt negotiations fail, the Treasury could ignore Congress and continue paying its bills on time.

“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”…[per Coons].

Critics of the debt limit cite the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which states: “the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by  law… shall not be questioned.” …

:UNQUOTE…. http://echilontel.com/2011/06/30/critics-label-debt-ceiling-unconstitutional-see-what-obama-thinks/

Personal observation: “The validity” has not been questioned. The time and manner of debt repayment is at issue.

There are “scholars” like Garrett Epps who are suggesting Obama usurp the Congress, as would any third world President-for-Life type. You might find his supporting article of interest at http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/05/our-national-debt-shall-not-be-questioned-the-constitution-says/238269/

However, I found this part of his bio, as included in the link above, to be humorous:

“Garrett Epps…is a novelist and legal scholar. He teaches courses in constitutional law and creative writing for law students…”

A novelist? A creative writer? I’ll say!

Who’s really in charge?

The Congress is really in charge – or should be. The One Great Reason? Congress has the absolute power to impeach, not subject to review or appeal by any other authority.

This sentence contains a lie: In the US, we speak of three separate but equal branches of government as part of a checks-and-balances system of power sharing: the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judiciary. The lie? They are not “equal branches,” due to the unchecked power of Congress to impeach members of the other two branches.

Congress can impeach (that is, remove from office) for [are you ready for this?] any reason whatsoever. The Constitution, to be sure, doesn’t say that, but think about it: If Congress’s decision to impeach is absolute, unshared, and unreviewable, Congress in reality may impeach for any reason whatsoever.

See for yourself in this quote from Article II, Section 4: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Since the Constitution leaves the “sole power of impeachment [without appeal]” to the House and the “sole power to try all impeachments” to the Senate, only those two bodies may define “other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Of course, if the voters should decide that the House and Senate had railroaded (for example) the President, they could vote out of office those lawmakers who voted “guilty.” But that would be the only restraint holding the Congress in check.

Limits of the Executive Branch

As might be expected, the Constitution itself gives a clue: “The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”

And what does an executive do? He executes! In particular, he sees to it that the laws passed by Congress are implemented. Even those laws that he himself might have vetoed, which became laws in spite of that. This emphasizes my belief in the President’s subordinate role: The President can’t just veto a bill – he is Constitutionally accountable to the Congress by means of Article I, Section 7:

“Every bill…if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which is shall have originated…”

In other words, the President has got to tell the Congress – in writing – why he chose not to sign a bill into law, thereby giving Congress another chance to bypass him with a two-thirds majority.

A lot of people would be surprised at how little power the Constitution actually allots to the president. Besides his limited role in passage of legislation, we have this – and only this [quotations from Article II follow…note my highlights]:

• he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments…

• he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

• He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties…

• The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate…

• He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient…

• he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper

• he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

·       with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law…

·       but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

That last point is worthy of emphasis: The Congress has the choice of giving appointment power to “the President alone” – or not. Sounds to me like the Congress is really in charge.

The relevant powers of Congress

This brief quote, from Article I, Section 8, should decisively decide the debt limit issue – in favor of Congress:

QUOTE:

The Congress shall have power to…pay the debts and provide for the…general welfare of the United States; to borrow money on the credit of the United States

:UNQUOTE.

It says, Congress shall have power to pay debts. But it doesn’t say when or under what circumstances. Or in exchange for whichever spending cuts Congress can negotiate with the President.

It says, Congress shall have power to borrow money. It doesn’t say the President can usurp that power in case of a “national emergency.”

It says, Congress (not the President) shall have power to provide for the general welfare of the United States. If the US goes into default because Congress and the President couldn’t come to an agreement, it would be up to the Congress to act. Since that body is charged with providing “for the general welfare,” our lawmakers will have to deal with the ensuing crisis. And if it decides the President was reckless in his disregard for the general welfare, Congress could and should impeach him.

[NOTE: I invite you to review the far more profound powers of Congress – as compared to those of the President at http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8 ]

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“Mr. President, you are staring out from the brink of an abyss – do not take that one step forward.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com