I think Kevin Drum is part right and part wrong. Unfortunately, I think he’s right about the actual 14th amendment. The only way to achieve the David Dayen interpretation (as opposed to the Kevin Drum interpretation) is if you interpret the word “debt” to include all our non-debt appropriated spending.

The 1935 Supreme Court ruling on the clause certainly didn’t interpret “debt” in such a way — it said that “debt” simply means bonds. While the 1935 Supreme Court was quite conservative, I don’t think that particular decision is a misreading of the word “debt.” It is just very hard to make the stretch from the word “debt” to “all spending” (even appropriated but unobligated spending). I don’t think that could reasonably be argued.

On the other hand, I also don’t think that anyone would have standing to challenge Obama’s action (whatever he decides). Modern standing doctrine requires that someone display an individualized, particularized injury in fact. General “I want elected officials to follow the law” theories generally don’t provide standing, as the current Supreme Court has ruled again and again in 5-4 cases (with Conservatives winning). This would be one instance where those rulings would come back to bite conservatives.

But even though it might be that no one would have standing to challenge Obama, I don’t think that’s a basis for Obama ignoring the law. That would really move us into a phase where Nixon’s “If the President does it, then it is legal” is operative. Or more specifically, it would set a precedent that the executive can do anything that people wouldn’t have standing to sue over. Because of the conservative Supreme Court’s restrictions on standing, that would be quite a lot, and would be the largest expansion of executive power by far in recent history.

I do think there is a solution though to the debt ceiling crisis. Rather than try to get around the law, maybe the right thing to do is exactly the opposite, in this sense.

Liberals are often frusturated, because we believe that if the people actually knew what the Republicans wanted for this country, they wouldn’t get more than 10-15% of the vote. But because people don’t pay attention, they really have no idea of what the real policies are that Republicans favor.

One of them (at least on the right of the party) is that the debt ceiling should not be raised. What would happen if Obama simply said “I encourage you to pass a debt ceiling increase, and I encourage the public to call Congress asking them to do so. If I don’t get such a bill on my desk by August 2nd, all non-interest spending will be cut immediately. While I hope Republicans will back down on enforcing their vision on the country, if they don’t, we will be able to see exactly what they would prefer our country do.”

August 3rd’s Social Security checks would have to either not go out or be cut in half (due to a 20 billion deficit on that day). The same would be true for future checks, and essentially all other government services. It would be just like super shutdown.

How long do you think it would be before Republicans caved in this case? I don’t think it would take long at all. They might not think so right now, but the desire to remain a relevant party in American policits can be quite a powerful motivator. This is close to what Clinton did in 1995, and the Republicans almost immediately caved (authorized more borrowing for Social Security specifically). Due to the fungibility of money, this solved the problem temporarily. The Republicans are scared to death about the people finding out what they really want for the country before the 2012 elections, and I think they would cave quite quickly.

It would also greatly improve accountability. Our country’s system of government structures greatly when one party blackmails the other party into doing something they do not approve of. It should not be the case that Obama takes the blame for what Republicans really want to happen to this country. This would allow the public to put the blame squarely on the Republicans for the consequences of their desire for an immediate 44% spending cut. If the public likes what they see, then perhaps Obama won’t win the standoff. But I don’t think there’s even a remote possibility that they will, and I think the over/under for the Republican caving time would be about 1.5 weeks. (Just a guess.) No permanent damage would result (it would be similar to the Clinton-era shutdowns), the public would see what the Republican vision is in all its shades, and the result would be much more favorable to the Democrats in terms of long term fiscal policy.

Super-scary:

Not to sound like a nuke industry shill, but this looks like pretty thin gruel.
It’s based on 13 additional case of infant mortality over a 4 week period (prorated)
in those cities, going up from 37 to 50. What’s the standard deviation for that statistic?
Did the author of that piece even know enough statistics to ask that question?

I think that what’s going on at the Nebraska plants is a lot more scary.

Transportation Security Administration union representatives in Boston have claimed that radiation from full-body scanners be responsible for a “cancer cluster” among airport security workers.

Whoops. structures greatly -> suffers greatly

SEC probing Monsanto’s incentives on Roundup

“Monsanto Co. announced Wednesday that the company is under investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for a program that offered incentives to dealers who sell the biotechnology giant’s Roundup weedkiller.”

LINK.

Monsanto’s done a lot more than kill weeds. Hope this is only a start.

President Thaddeus McCotter? More like “guy who’s getting a raw deal in redistricting looking for some exposure for his next career on K Street.”

I was wondering why he would think anyone wanted him to be President.

Video shows shocking police abuse amid Greek protest LINK.

Florida rejects millions more in federal health-care grants

“In the past week, Florida lawmakers turned down a $2.1 million federal grant that would pave the way for the state to receive $35 million in federal funding that would move elderly and disabled patients from nursing homes to their own homes during the next five years.”

LINK.

Wish these funds were like the light-rail funds and other states could petition for them since FL (with that huge elderly population!) doesn’t want them–or at least not until their suit about ObamaCare is resolved.

Wikileaks: US Embassy Requests Funding for Anti-Chavez Groups

“US efforts to undermine the Chavez administration have largely depended on the capacity of the opposition to destabilize the country and counter Chavez. After years of multimillion-dollar investments in these groups, which now depend on US government funding, few advances have been made. This scenario could explain the recent aggressive actions the Obama administration is taking against Venezuela, imposing sanctions and attempting to falsely and maliciously link the Chavez government to terrorism and portray it as a “failed state”.”

LINK.

Ah, family values.

Ohio Rep [Bob Mecklenborg (R-Green Townshp)] Arrested for DUI With Young Woman Who’s Not His Wife in Car

“Ohio political blog Plunderbund.com got a hold of Mecklenborg’s arrest record and added more details: a blood test showed Mecklenborg had Viagra in his system, and he was accompanied by 26-year-old Tiona Roberts, who is not his wife.”

LINK.

There’s no test for Viagra so at least part of that story is false.

Incidentally, gay rights groups are urging Governor Chafee to veto the civil unions bill in Rhode Island because the religious exemption carve-outs are heinous, and would take the state backward from its current recognition of same-sex couples. It’s unimaginable that a gay Democratic house speaker would let such a bill go to the governor, but he did.

Also on the medical beat, radiation exposure doesn’t show up as infant mortality this early so that’s a fluke.

On the debt limit, as ericj115 and others have said, no one has standing to stop the president from ignoring the law to prevent a crisis. And the voters who would oppose him probably aren’t going to vote for him anyway.

I am not sure there has been a decline with Stern, as much as it is just getting more obvious.

“It can’t be about icons ever again”

I sort of disagree with this statement. One can argue as to whether grassroots organizing can ever be powerful enough to overcome to corporatocracy. But it’s hard to argue that the most important requirement for progressive change is a “fierce advocate” in the White House.

Speaking of which, Mark Halperin sounds like a blowhard, but to his credit he was the first person I know to dig deep into Obama’s background and conclude that he was not liberal.

Hugh Hewitt on Halperin:

Mark Halperin is a star of the Beltway-Manhattan media elite, a lefty and transparently so. But he is also a terrific though deeply biased political reporter and his slip into street-talk on air today needed and got an apology, but a suspension? I have been in broadcast studios, both television and radio, for two decades and the pejorative Halperin used is as common as it is low on the scale of insults towards political figures. So what is MSNBC saying with this absurd display of “standards?” That none of its hosts talk this way, or that they don’t talk this way on air? If it is the later, it is a mistake in delivery, not a moral offense, and no suspension is necessary. If the later, there will be a whole lot more suspensions coming down the pike at MSNBC.

I have to suspect that the real crime in MSNBC’s eyes is that Halperin broke faith with the fever swamp’s favorite president and that the core demo rose up proclaiming that the president should never be criticized, even by an acolyte like Halperin.

And make no mistake –Halperin is an Obama acolyte. His book Game Change makes clear that he sat on story after story that would have hurt the Democrats generally and the president’s nomination and election specifically throughout the 2008 campaign until after the voting was done. There is no higher service than helping deep six the bad news, and Mark Halperin came through for Obama and the left when it counted. So eighteen months out from the next election he shows a little false independence from the boss, the better to serve the big guy over the next year-and-a-half, and MSNBC blows it up into a display of “journalistic ethics” –from the most reliably unhinged, hard-left studios in the business. Sheesh.

John Dean Knows How to Get Rid of Clarence Thomas

“For good reason, there has been serious hand-wringing over what to do about the ethical lapses of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. The fact that Supreme Court justices are exempt from the code of ethical conduct which applies to the rest of the federal judiciary; the problem of bringing a sitting justice before the Congress to question the conduct of a constitutional co-equal; the reality that justices cannot easily defend themselves against news media charges; the defiant, in-your-face posture of Thomas—the list goes on but it need not. There is clear precedent for how to deal with the justice. Thomas could be forced off the bench.”

LINK.

I question the assertion that the failure to raise the debt limit would have any impact on Social Security checks whatsoever. First, the Social Security payroll tax is a separate revenue stream which is legally dedicated to the payment of Social Security benefits. Second, any shortfall in the revenue from the payroll tax to pay current benefits would be made up by the redemption of the Social Security bonds issued by the Federal government over the past 30 years. The Social Security bonds are as much of a debt under the 14th amendment as any debt to China or Wall Street. Therefore, it would seem that Social Security benefits would be untouched by any failure to raise the debt limit.

If Drum is correct (and I think he may well be), the first thing the administration should stop paying is the pension and health benefits for members of Congress – specifically Republicans. This should be followed by holding the paychecks for Congressman and Congressional staff. Let Congress “share” in the consequences of their actions. Perhaps, they would begin “to feel our pain.” This is what FDR would have done.

I don’t get that.

Roundup is to farmers like heroin is to junkie. they just can’t live without it here in North America.

I saw this laugher in the same place:

at some conference in Chicago:

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner gave the concluding address Thursday and said America is “way ahead” of the rest of the world in repairing damage from the global financial crisis.
Geithner told Clinton that there are signs of strength in the economy, including more capital in banks and more loans for small businesses.
Geithner said he wouldn’t want to trade America’s problems for any other country’s problems.

I guess they wanted to end the thing with a few laughs.

Yeah, maybe Timmie has a big future in stand-up comedy. Good catch!

kinetic military action.

good lord.