Senate Debt Deal Includes Provision Lessening Congress' Power On Debt Ceiling

http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver...ushups-afp.jpg


Senate Debt Deal Weakens Congress on Debt Ceiling

by Kerry Picket 16 Oct 2013, 4:13 PM PDT 152 post a comment

Capitol Hill talk regarding the Senate deal apparently includes a provision that would take away the Congress’ power to increase the debt ceiling. According to Politico, it looks like the buzz appears to be true.:

The plan includes a proposal offered by McConnell in the 2011 debt ceiling crisis that allows Congress to disapprove of the debt ceiling increase, which means lawmakers will formally vote on whether to reject a debt ceiling increase until Feb. 7. Obama can veto that legislation if it passes. If Congress fails as expected to gather a two-thirds majority to override the veto, the debt ceiling would be raised.

National Journal reported last week:

Whether it's four weeks from now or in one year, there'd be even less reason to put faith in a last-minute deal next time the U.S. is up against the debt limit.

There's only one foolproof way to avoid a future crisis: Fundamentally change the way the debt ceiling works.

This approach isn't all that radical. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., proposed a reform in January that would change the debt-ceiling mechanism so that Congress would vote to disapprove of an increase, as opposed to approving one. Such a change would limit debt-ceiling negotiations to a veto-proof majority, while still leaving Congress with some power.

The most interesting part of this proposal? It was originally floated in 2011 by Republican leader Sen. Mitch McConnell. The potential for a bipartisan deal here that fixes the debt-limit problem is real. Sen. Boxer continues to advocate for the change. Right now though, Harry Reid's office says the senator is not considering any disapproval mechanism. But that could change as this process moves on.

Such a plan would be obviously good for Democrats, as they can get the immediate gratification of not having to risk default in order to fully implement the Affordable Care Act. But it'd be good for Republicans too, who could not only avoid the stigma of blame for a default, but also presumably reap the ruling-party rewards in future Congresses and presidencies. It would also put an immediate political target on President Obama, and Democrats by association, for being the sole entity responsible for raising the debt limit by over a trillion dollars. That opportunity has got to sound pretty good to Republicans ahead of 2014.

Additionally, New York Magazine remarked, the provision would "defang the debt ceiling, returning it to its historical place as an opportunity for ineffectual posturing rather than extortion." However it would only apply to the next debt ceiling vote. The debt limit can only currently be increased if Congress affirmatively votes to raise it and the president signs it into law. During Congress' last debt limit debate in 2011, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R - KY) wanted to invert this process by making it automatic, unless Congress voted against it and the president did not veto it. Theoretically, Congress could override a veto, but given the current makeup of both chambers that would be nearly impossible.

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2...e-Debt-Ceiling

Shutdown Shuts Down: Dems And RINOs Win, Conservatives Lose In Congress’ Capitulation To Obama

October 16, 2013 by Ben Bullard

The Senate is ending the government shutdown. By the time you read this, the Senate will likely have voted on a bill to fund the government through January 15 of next year and to raise the Federal debt limit until February 7. The only GOP “win” in the Senate bill involves new requirements that Obamacare buyers seeking government subsidies must prove their qualifications by demonstrating low income.
With a House vote expected later in the evening, President Barack Obama is expected to sign off on the bill before the Thursday debt limit “deadline,” as forecast by the U.S. Treasury.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is not expected to delay or attempt to amend whatever the Senate is passing. “We fought the good fight; we just didn’t win,” he said Wednesday on a Cincinnati radio show. “There’s no reason for our members to vote ‘no’ today,” he said later.
Boehner’s full capitulation comes just a day after House Republicans attempted to counter the Senate bill by cobbling together their own last-minute plan before realizing the votes to see it through simply weren’t there.
Even Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who had stood firm against the debt limit deal unless Congress voted to defund Obamacare, stood aside Wednesday to allow the Senate to expedite a vote – even though Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) cannot bring the measure before the full Senate for consideration today without unanimous consent.
Judging from conservative comments across the internet, there’s a great deal of ambivalence among Republicans as to whether Cruz is to be praised or blamed for his role in the shutdown debate – including Wednesday’s go-along.
On one hand, Cruz mobilized whatever conservative support might have been latent among Congressional GOP leaders and their constituents. He did strike early and often – when tapping into public opinion to defund Obamacare and pressuring Congress to listen to the people’s will would have mattered. He had little GOP support, as the ensuing weeks proved.
On the other hand, there’s no denying that Cruz kept up his tough talk while dialing down his walk, once it became clear that he and Mike Lee (and maybe Rand Paul) were becoming an increasingly isolated three-man army within their own party’s Senate bloc. He or Lee or anyone could filibuster today’s Senate vote and bide more time for leveraged compromise, if leveraged compromise were in the offing.
But the majority of spineless Senate Republicans simply wouldn’t sit at Cruz’ table. A unified pushback against the Democrats never stood a chance of coming together from the balkanized ranks of Republican Senators.
And it’s important to remember there’s little gain in vilifying the few Congressmen who put up a principled fight, when the entire charade was perpetrated from the far left. If Obama and Reid and lock-step Democrats weren’t hell-bent on borrowing more money – Obamacare concessions be damned – there would never have been a fight between the GOP-controlled House and the Democratic-controlled Senate in the first place.
Instead, we’re on track to make debt-ceiling history once again. Now that Obama and the Dems have carte blanche, we should be ticking past the $17 trillion threshold any day now.

Filed Under: Liberty News, Staff Reports

http://personalliberty.com/2013/10/1...tion-to-obama/

78% Want To Throw Out Entire Congress and Start Over

If the next congressional election were held today, it would be bad news for the current members of Congress from both major parties.

Read More

CONSTITUTIONAL CRISES -- Senate Debt Deal Includes Provision Lessening Congress' Power On Debt Ceiling... Gives Power to Executive Branch!

October 16, 2013/ RedFlag

http://static.squarespace.com/static...5/?format=750w

(BREITBART) -- Capitol Hill talk regarding the Senate deal apparently includes a provision that would take away the Congress’ power to increase the debt ceiling. According to Politico, it looks like the buzz appears to be true.:

The plan includes a proposal offered by McConnell in the 2011 debt ceiling crisis that allows Congress to disapprove of the debt ceiling increase, which means lawmakers will formally vote on whether to reject a debt ceiling increase until Feb. 7. Obama can veto that legislation if it passes. If Congress fails as expected to gather a two-thirds majority to override the veto, the debt ceiling would be raised.

National Journal reported last week:

Whether it's four weeks from now or in one year, there'd be even less reason to put faith in a last-minute deal next time the U.S. is up against the debt limit.

There's only one foolproof way to avoid a future crisis: Fundamentally change the way the debt ceiling works.

This approach isn't all that radical. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., proposed a reform in January that would change the debt-ceiling mechanism so that Congress would vote to disapprove of an increase, as opposed to approving one. Such a change would limit debt-ceiling negotiations to a veto-proof majority, while still leaving Congress with some power.

The most interesting part of this proposal? It was originally floated in 2011 by Republican leader Sen. Mitch McConnell. The potential for a bipartisan deal here that fixes the debt-limit problem is real. Sen. Boxer continues to advocate for the change. Right now though, Harry Reid's office says the senator is not considering any disapproval mechanism. But that could change as this process moves on.

Such a plan would be obviously good for Democrats, as they can get the immediate gratification of not having to risk default in order to fully implement the Affordable Care Act. But it'd be good for Republicans too, who could not only avoid the stigma of blame for a default, but also presumably reap the ruling-party rewards in future Congresses and presidencies.

It would also put an immediate political target on President Obama, and Democrats by association, for being the sole entity responsible for raising the debt limit by over a trillion dollars. That opportunity has got to sound pretty good to Republicans ahead of 2014.

Additionally, New York Magazine remarked, the provision would "defang the debt ceiling, returning it to its historical place as an opportunity for ineffectual posturing rather than extortion." However it would only apply to the next debt ceiling vote. The debt limit can only currently be increased if Congress affirmatively votes to raise it and the president signs it into law. During Congress' last debt limit debate in 2011, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R - KY) wanted to invert this process by making it automatic, unless Congress voted against it and the president did not veto it. Theoretically, Congress could override a veto, but given the current makeup of both chambers that would be nearly impossible.

Read more via Breitbart...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV8Nc...layer_embedded


http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines...ecutive-branch