“they have already made appropriations”. Who? When? There is no current fiscal 2011 “budget”. Remember, it’s all a continuing resolution.
And Congress can appropriate until the cows come home, that doesn’t bind the executive branch to actually spend it. We know Obama will and more, but it’s not required by law.
I don’t believe federal salaries are required to be paid by law. Or military and others since Obama just said they can’t be guaranteed. Is he breaking the “law”? Then why isn’t he arrested? Impeached? Tried?
Besides, the “law” you think applies is unconstitutional. The Constitution doesn’t require federal pay, or spending on Congressionally passed programs. I know, no one cares about the Constitution any longer. But it’s not illegal to cut spending if the executive branch wants to.
““they have already made appropriations”. Who? When? There is no current fiscal 2011 “budget”. Remember, it’s all a continuing resolution.”
Back when the April deal was made, FY2011 appropriations have been passed into law. Govt is legally obligated until end of Sept to go with that budget. In addition, there are ‘mandatory’ (vs discretionary) funds that ARE indeed legal obligations.
“I don’t believe federal salaries are required to be paid by law.”
Your non-belief doesnt erase budgets authorized by law. I would suppose a fiscal conservative might take notice of your point and use the debt ceiling increase to furlough workers. But we dont have a fiscal conservative do we? He will surely do the most painful things, like stop social security checks, and at the same time keep all the workers fully paid with no real cuts at all.
Whether you like it or not, there are laws requiring executive branch to spend it, and Obama will use those laws as a sheild for his actions.
Just imagine what you would do if you were President and this debt ceiling didnt pass ... then consider the exact opposite of that - Obama will do the latter.
” Or military and others since Obama just said they can’t be guaranteed. Is he breaking the “law”?”
Just as contractual obligations you make to pay your mortgage cant be kept if you run out of money, so too with the federal govt. That’s why they are talking ‘default’. Obama is saying he cant guarantee they will live up to obligations. You can say he’s lying, but he’s president.
“Then why isn’t he arrested? Impeached? Tried?”
There is no criminal act if the President doesnt pay bills he cant pay because the Congress didnt give him the authority to borrow the money to do it.
And it would be ironic for Congress to impeach the President over their own failure to act and raise the debt ceiling to match the FY 2011 deficit created by Congressional budgeting.
“Besides, the “law” you think applies is unconstitutional. The Constitution doesn’t require federal pay, or spending on Congressionally passed programs.”
Just because the Constitution doesnt require something doesnt mean a law requiring it is unconstitutional. That’s for SCOTUS to decide (they probably wont since it is inter-branch issue).
“But it’s not illegal to cut spending if the executive branch wants to.”
And again, nobody will impeach the President for shutting down the govt because we ran out of money. They wont even impeach him if he unnecessarily defaults. Congress is co-equal to blame here.
If the Tea Party folks would stop imagining the debt ceiling = budget authority, they’d realize that the ‘no debt ceiling increase, that’ll stop the spending’ is an untenable and meaningless position. Nope, all it does is create a crisis, and that is the one thing that Obama can use for his political advantage. The real solution is through the budget process. The debt ceiling increase can ONLY be used as a bargaining chip for leverage in that process, it CANNOT be used to legally stop spending. that has been the GOP leadership approach, and they have done a good job, but run into the wall of spendthrift-baloney-non-leadership in Obama. As a bargaining chip, its a great position to go with ‘cut, cap and balance’, but understand that at some point we have to negotiate on something with a Democrat Senate. We need to be firm but not so brittle we break.
McConnell, in his frustration, knows what I just said above it true, and decided on a plan B to put onus on President. Nobody else likes it, I dont like it, its a cave in. But it is recognizing 2 realities - the President has not come up with anything, and we cannot use the debt ceiling to force the President to be fiscally responsible.
In the end a small debt ceiling raise with incremental spending cuts is the most we can get out of this current President. We should go that route. The president objects, but if we at least get something on his desk, it will be on HIM to default.