Why is Biden being held to this standard? I don't recall any media outlets expressing any concerns Trump might crow about the budget or debt ceiling.
@femme_mal also why do all media outlets get it purposefully wrong that the issue is made solely by congress alone.
Because everywhere else, parlaments have to automatically approve more debt if the budget exceeds earned taxes as they literally decided upon said budget.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIbkoop4AYE
The #DebtCeiling is literally the USA deciding to order but not pay when it's due and every other nation would get their credit rating corrected into trash-tier if they did that!
@kkarhan U.S. Constitution specifically says "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills" and "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States...To borrow Money on the credit of the United States" so yes, it's on Congress.
But... /1
@kkarhan ...the Executive Branch is final authority when opposition has insufficient votes to override a veto if Executive doesn't like the budget/debt ceiling.
The Executive as figurative leader of his party also plays a role in setting budget priorities for Congressional representatives who are members of his party. Executive doesn't bear as much responsibility as Congress but they do play a role. /2
@femme_mal exactly that's the problem.
I wish #Buden had the balls to jist #ExecutiveOrder away the #DebtCeiling cuz #SCOTUS would take months till they'd ever do any hearing...
https://mstdn.social/@kkarhan/110471494441369149
Biden has no authority to issue any executive order that would have undermined the Constitution to get rid of the debt ceiling.
It would have been absolutely illegal.
Presidents don't have the unilateral authority to just do what they want. They aren't kings. They can't just ignore the law, ignore the Constitution, when their obligations become inconvenient to them.
But most of all keep in mind how anti-democratic what you are saying is. You are talking about removing from the people the vote as to whether generations of Americans should be beholden to debt obligations.
I keep in mind just how extreme your proposal really is.
@volkris @kkarhan If you're not a lawyer with a deep background working con law, I don't think you can make an absolutist statement about illegality.
The problem with using an EO is that the underlying con law which would likely be used to support such an effort has *never* been tested, and this particular iteration of the Roberts court is unlikely to exercise anything but the most partisan analysis as it has ex. Dobbs.
The debt was created, it's valid and must be paid per the 14th Amendment.
@volkris @kkarhan You're right; POTUS is not a monarch with absolute, unilateral autocratic powers. But POTUS's job is to execute the laws and the laws include providing all the goods and services spelled out by legislation and the annual budget.
If the people don't like how this is being done in this democracy, the remedy is to sue POTUS if they have standing, replace POTUS, demand Congress issue corrective legislation, or to replace Congress.
Monarchs aren't subject to the people's demands.
When the people we've elected pass laws that are impossible to execute, as is the current situation, that doesn't grant the president extra power.
Rather it means the laws themselves are subject to nullification. And yes, we should vote all of the clowns out. But we reelected them, so *shrug*
The last Congress voted to authorize the president to spend a bunch of money that wouldn't exist. "Out of the $10 in your pocket, you may spend $20."
That's not license for the president to mug someone to acquire the extra $10. It means the $10 of spending can't happen, so the president is right to ignore the impossible action.
If a parliament passes a budget then lord knows the US president should ignore it since there is no parliament involved in the US system of government :)
The US does not have a parliamentary system of government. The one has nothing to do with the other.
The US system is fundamentally different from a parliamentary system for better or worse.
@volkris @femme_mal I just think the core problem is absurd clown-poltricks and blaming the POTUS for something not in the power of said office is a clear sigh of absurdity.
If a parlament passes a budget that requires new debt then it must also allow the additional debt.
And every other nation would rightfully get ranked trash-tier andbe yeeted out of IMF and World Bank if it wasn't the USA...
But then again the #USA also criminalizes poverty symptoms instead of fixing the issues...