The Patriot Post® · A Hole in the Argument for an Extension of Debt Using the 14th Amendment

Synopsis: This is a brief discussion of my understanding of the 14th amendment to the US Constitution and how the Democrats and this administration may attempt to erroneously use this amendment to avoid the constitutional power of the purse granted solely to the US House of Representatives.

The Democrats may now make an argument, based upon the 14th amendment to the US Constitution, that the president does not have to abide by the debt ceiling limitations that are passed by Congress. The 14th amendment to the US Constitution as ratified in 1868 as a post civil war reconstruction amendment seeks, as its primary function, to reinforce the abolition of slavery and to ensure the rights of all those emancipated. However, section 4 of this amendment pertains to the public debt and reads as follows:

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.

The Democrats may now try to parse this section in an attempt to give it a meaning that will allow the president to override the debt ceiling that congress has legislated into place. Unfortunately, upon reading the full text of this amendment, one can clearly see that the first sentence includes the clause authorized by law. Since the US House of Representatives holds the power of the purse and since only the entire US Congress has the power to pass laws, it should be obvious (even to the most power-hungry politician) that the president has to abide by the debt-ceiling imposed by Congress. All the president has the power to do is to trim his over-priced staff of excessive use of high-priced consultants and to trim the salaries or numbers of political appointees within the executive branch.

Now an argument could be made that the US Congress, in authorizing spending, has already approved the debt necessary to fund its passed programs. Unfortunately, debt is only incurred upon the real spending of resources or the actual sale of bonds to raise capital to meet future expenses. Planned spending and the planned floating of a debt issue do not qualify as actual incurrence of debt. Once an actual debt is incurred, then the government must meet its debt obligations as stated in this amendment. However, planned spending and its inherent debt obligation can always be reversed prior to the actual need to spend or incur additional debt. Also, the US Congress could pass laws prioritizing existing debt and laws that authorize the short-funding or defunding of any additional spending that would require the meeting of this new proposed debt obligation. The executive branch has no power to override the US Congress in this matter according to my reading of the US Constitution, its 14th amendment, and who controls the power of the purse.

The 4th section of the 14th amendment makes clear that US debt is sacrosanct, but its main function, upon its ratification, was to exclude any debt incurred by the confederacy or by slave-holders as part of the US debt. Once again we have an instance that shows that the Democrats and this Democrat president (along with his administration cronies) have a willingness to interpret the US Constitution to rationalize the argument that they can set up a more authoritarian form of governance in this country that allows for a dictatorial president to authorize spending and debt obligations at will when his/her aims cannot be lawfully and Constitutionally attained. I’m sure that if the Republicans or other constitutional conservatives had control of the US Congress and the presidency and attempted this type of takeover that the mainstream media, and all of the so-called liberals in this country, would be up in arms and on the street protesting already. 

Contact: [email protected]