You're talking second order effects, and I do agree with you on that. But Congress has authorized the spending. And it is against the law (as passed by congress

You're talking second order effects, and I do agree with you on that. But Congress has authorized the spending. And it is against the law (as passed by congress) for the executive to _not spend_ money that has been appropriated. And it is illegal for the executive to borrow money to achieve those spending goals. I think someone called it a trilemma -- Congress has passed a rock-paper-scissors law, and left no legal action that can be taken by the executive. Except that there's a loophole that they can mint the coin. Congress can close that loophole if they want! But right now it exists. If Congress wants to control spending they should control spending, not force the executive branch to choose which law to break because they are in contradiction.