4 ms·

Most other countries allow the executive branch to simply borrow money, not whenever it sees fit, but when it is required to execute the budget approved by the

Most other countries allow the executive branch to simply borrow money, not whenever it sees fit, but when it is required to execute the budget approved by the legislative branch. That is an important distinction.

deprecative 3y ago
[flagged]
- rjtavares 3y ago
  It is, because saying "executive branch can simply borrow money whenever it sees fit" makes it seem like the executive has unlimited power to spend.
  - deprecative 3y ago
    The Executive isn't determining that they need to borrow money. Congress did when they passed a budget and the Executive signed it into law. At that point Congress authorized revenue, borrowing, and expenditures, and other monetary considerations. So, again, there is no merit to the debt ceiling. It exists solely to act as a hostage for conservatives to use to harm the economy and claw back our safety net funding targeting veterans, the elderly, those living in poverty, and other vulnerable demographics.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Constitution explicitly prevents us from defaulting This is far from settled law. What it means for a debt to be “authorised by law” within this context is unresolved and frankly unclear. (The 14th Amendment requires paying debts. Not issuing new debt. Maybe the solution is forced sale of public assets, et cetera.)
- jakear 3y ago
  In fact, we’ve defaulted many times in the past, but nobody seems to care about that. The treasury secretary indeed lied through her teeth about it, as did the WH press secretary. But of course, the media talking point is to blame Republicans for this “unprecedented calamity”. https://www.axios.com/2023/05/16/us-history-debt-default https://www.axios.com/2023/05/16/us-history-debt-default
- makomk 3y ago
  It's an extremely important distinction. For example, Parliament in the UK has to pass a budget every year in order to authorise continuing government spending and taxation, without which the government effectively cannot operate - there's no debt ceiling, but this serves the same basic purpose as Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution which is what limits the power of taxation and borrowing to Congress and lead to the debt ceiling. I think this is pretty common in parlimentary systems in general.
  - noodlesUK 3y ago
    There’s an important destination here when talking about Westminster style systems. If a government were unable to secure enough votes for a budget, constitutionally this is the same as a confidence vote. The government would be dissolved and a new government would be formed either by a different coalition or a general election. A budget is sometimes called a supply bill. When people talk about confidence and supply, that’s what they mean.

deprecative 3y ago

[flagged]

rjtavares 3y ago
It is, because saying "executive branch can simply borrow money whenever it sees fit" makes it seem like the executive has unlimited power to spend.
- deprecative 3y ago
  The Executive isn't determining that they need to borrow money. Congress did when they passed a budget and the Executive signed it into law. At that point Congress authorized revenue, borrowing, and expenditures, and other monetary considerations. So, again, there is no merit to the debt ceiling. It exists solely to act as a hostage for conservatives to use to harm the economy and claw back our safety net funding targeting veterans, the elderly, those living in poverty, and other vulnerable demographics.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Constitution explicitly prevents us from defaulting This is far from settled law. What it means for a debt to be “authorised by law” within this context is unresolved and frankly unclear. (The 14th Amendment requires paying debts. Not issuing new debt. Maybe the solution is forced sale of public assets, et cetera.)
jakear 3y ago
In fact, we’ve defaulted many times in the past, but nobody seems to care about that. The treasury secretary indeed lied through her teeth about it, as did the WH press secretary. But of course, the media talking point is to blame Republicans for this “unprecedented calamity”. https://www.axios.com/2023/05/16/us-history-debt-default https://www.axios.com/2023/05/16/us-history-debt-default
makomk 3y ago
It's an extremely important distinction. For example, Parliament in the UK has to pass a budget every year in order to authorise continuing government spending and taxation, without which the government effectively cannot operate - there's no debt ceiling, but this serves the same basic purpose as Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution which is what limits the power of taxation and borrowing to Congress and lead to the debt ceiling. I think this is pretty common in parlimentary systems in general.
- noodlesUK 3y ago
  There’s an important destination here when talking about Westminster style systems. If a government were unable to secure enough votes for a budget, constitutionally this is the same as a confidence vote. The government would be dissolved and a new government would be formed either by a different coalition or a general election. A budget is sometimes called a supply bill. When people talk about confidence and supply, that’s what they mean.