You know, I gotta be honest, I dont really expect to have a job where I have to swear an oath to something, but I know if I did, I'd be damn sure to read the thing I had to swear a oath too.
Sadly though, that doesnt appear to be a job requirement or even apparently a good idea to some people.
And it gets worse, because a lot of the time, those same people who never read the Constitution get elected, and then try to propose law and even amendments to the Constitution that they never read.
Such seems to be the case of US Congressman from Alabama Mo Brooks, who has proposed an amendment that would make it possible to impeach the president for a budget deficit.
See under Brooks' plan, congress would need a 4/5th vote in both houses to raise the debt ceiling (which as I keep harping on, basically means "pay the bills" at this point), except in "war time" which would only require a simple majority.
BTW, nothing requries a 4/5ths majority, peace treaties, other treaties, constitutional amendments and even impeachment itself, only require 2/3rds. Just to give you an idea of where he is setting the bar.
Now the "trade off" for the high bar on the debt ceiling is that the president can do anything that is constitutional to keep the budget balanced (and therefore out of debt)................with one exception of course, "The President may not order any increase in taxes or other revenue measures to enforce the Amendment,"
I've mentioned before about how and why you actually would need to raise taxes to have the government we want, but the short version is, to have the government Americans want, we could cut everything they dont want to 0, and we still wouldnt have enough money coming in to pay for it, and this is still true (although slightly better) even after the fiscal cliff tax increases. And thats just taxes, not other things that would count as revenue increases (like cracking down on tax cheats and closing loopholes)
Ah, but their is one last step. See if the president CANT get the budget balanced for any given year, he can be impeached for failure to do his job.
Now a couple of things to keep in mind about the amendment itself:
Were it ever to pass (and it wont), impeaching the president, EVERY president, would actually be an easier thing to do then voting to increase the debt ceiling (2/3rds to impeach vs 4/5ths to raise), so their is actually an incentive to impeach rather then fix the problem. And second, because of the ban on anything having to deal with revenue, it comes with an incentive to basically not pay your taxes (since cracking down on tax cheats is politically defined as a "revenue raiser" by the republican party), thereby basically ensuring we will never have any money of any kind.....except from stupid people who dont realize they dont have to pay
So this basically boils down to a "impeach the president for free card" especially when you consider one final fact, and one that Congressman Brooks amendment doesnt deal with......the Constitution as currently written, which Mr. Brooks has never read.
See think back to the "trade off" part, the president can do anything that's constitutional to balance the budget. Well see here's the problem, from Article 1 Section 8 AKA the enumerated powers clause that spells out exactly what congress can do:
"The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;..." (the list includes a bunch of things not relevant making war, passing treaties ect so I stopped the list here)
Basically, according to the Constitution the president's legal authority as it relates to the budget is exactly "nothing". He cant do a thing about the budget, except sign off on budget bills congress gives him, thats the total limit of his power.
Oh and a further consideration: Article 1 Section 7 of the Constitution "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 Congressman Brooks amendment does nothing to change the text of those two sections.
Now even though republicans don't like to publicly admit to it, EVERY budget raises some revenue, so basically all spending bills must start in the house. (you cant pay for anything without "rasing revenue" as its usually defined even if that payment is cutting another program as an "offset", the fact the money was moved into the new program is a "raise in revenue for that program")
So according to the Constitution, the House has 100% of the control over the budget, and should Mr. Brooks amendment become law, if the house cant pass a budget, or the senate refuses to pass the house budget, we impeach the president.....who is neither in the House or the Senate, and cant do anything about the issue in question. In other-words we could call this the "Dodging responsibility/blame the guy who didnt do it" amendment
Seriously, a senate filibuster (of the budget) would lead to a presidential impeachment. So would a bill intentionally so unpopular it couldnt pass the House.
Where's the logic in that?
Near as I can tell, it doesnt exist, so I can only see too options
The first is the easier one to believe personally, which is that despite being in his second term, Mr Brooks has never read the Constitution and therefore has no idea how stupid his amendment actually is, earning him the title of "Felony stupid" (although if you got a better term for trying to change something you never read, I'm open to suggestions)
Or option B. Mr. Brooks DOES know the Constitution, knows exactly what it says, and know exactly what his amendment would basically do (freebie to impeach the president simply by refusing to do his own job)....and just figures no one will catch on to the "scam" despite the way the bill is written. And since the "hole in the bills logic" isnt even remotely hidden or disguised, he clearly thinks the rest of us are too stupid to read. And if your trying to scam someone, leaving what is basically a giant flashing sign to what the scam is is also felony stupid.
A wise man one said something about getting the government you deserve.....for the people of northern Alabama who just reelected this guy, you might want to take note.
No comments:
Post a Comment