'Aiding and Abetting' – The demise of Congress over Debt

By SUA Staff – With the incessant ‘end runs’ around the Congress in his first four years, now it looks like the big one is before us – applying some arcane twisted logic that the 14th Amendment gives the President unfettered spending power. Now, the Majority Leader and other Democrats are ‘aiding and abetting’ that effort.

Though the Constitution reads as follows:

Section 7 – Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

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.


Section 8 – Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence 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; (read more here.)

If Obama declares that the 14th Amendment gives him such powers, effectively stripping them away from the House of Representatives, there will be a Constitutional crisis that MUST come before the Supreme Court. If that court does not see fit to stop him, possibly due to imminent retirements of Justices being replaced by liberals appointed by Obama, changing the 5-4 balance right to a 5-4 left or worse, our Congress shall at that time be rendered meaningless.

The Senate has already become meaningless since Harry Reid has already seen fit to ignore its primary purpose – passing a budget. He is in criminal contempt of the Constitution for not passing a budget in over 1,3o0 days, that is a complete abrogation of his oath and that of every Senator seated.

Only now are we finally hearing some elected officials accuse Reid of criminal negligence in the malfeasance of his and many others’ duties they swore to uphold and defend. Many ask if he is committing a felony or a misdemeanor, but either way its criminal:

I have one question about the way Majority Leader Harry Reid has been conducting the Senate. Has he committed a felony or a mere misdemeanor?

Majority Leader Harry’s transgression is that for over 1300 days he has failed to pass a budget. In fact, there is no evidence he has even tried. This is against the law. Federal law clearly requires the Congress to pass a budget every year. I presume the reasoning behind this is that the American people deserve to know what their taxes are paying for, or another way of putting it is, why are the American people being mulcted every year by the Internal Revenue Service to pay for Harry and his gang’s criminal activities? (Read more here.)

That of course means that the people will no longer have a voice in their government and our nation shall effectively become a dictatorship, especially if they somehow find a way to overturn the 22nd Amendment.

Senate Democrats to offer no-limit credit to Obama

By Neil Munro at the Daily Caller

Top Democratic leaders in the U.S. Senate have reportedly told the executive branch they won’t object if the president simply declares he has the power to impose even greater financial debts on Americans.

The announcement, leaked Jan. 10 by a Democratic aide to The Washington Post, would effectively give the White House the unprecedented power to borrow and spend as much money as it wishes — unless the Supreme Court intervenes.

If allowed to stand by the court, the decision by Senate Democrats would effectively gut the authority of Congress’ two bodies — the Senate and House of Representatives — to jointly govern borrowing by the executive branch.

“The four Democratic leaders — Senators Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Patty Murray — have privately reached agreement that continued GOP intransigence on the debt ceiling means the White House needs the space to pursue options for raising it that don’t involve Congress,” according to the report in the Post.

“The White House needs to know that Dems will support whatever it decides to do,” read the report.

GOP Senators have decried the self-imposed diminution of the Senate, which was once lauded as “world’s the greatest deliberative body.”

The Democrats’ offer “is not only the height of irresponsibility, but also a guarantee that our national debt crisis will only get worse,” said the Republicans’ Senate leader Mitch McConnell.

“Rather than offering any plan to break the spending habit that’s causing the problem, Democrats are looking at everything from the ridiculous (printing a trillion-dollar coin) to outright abdication of Congressional responsibility,” he said.

“Democrats in Washington are falling all over themselves in an effort to do anything they can to get around the law—and to avoid taking any responsibility for Washington’s out-of-control spending … which is why many of us view the upcoming debt limit debate as a perfect opportunity to face up to Washington’s spending,” he said.

Speaker of the House John Boehner also denounced the unprecedented move.

“Senate Democrats cannot ignore their responsibilities for political convenience — and the American people will not tolerate an increase in the debt limit without spending cuts and reforms,” said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel.

“Out-of-control Washington spending is costing jobs now, and condemning future generations of Americans to a lower standard of living. Washington Democrats must stop spending money we don’t have,” he said.

Congress’ sole authority over the nation’s debt is enshrined in Section 8 of Article 1 the Constitution, which says “Congress shall have the power to … borrow money on the credit of the United States.”

The Constitution does not give the executive branch any legal authority to borrow money from outsides sources.

The Congress’ power is implemented via the the Public Debts Acts of 1939 and 1941.

We don't need no budgets! Harry Reid

SUA Staff – It is likely no surprise to anyone that Harry Reid will not allow any budget to hit the Senate floor this year for 2013. After all, its been over 1,000 days since the Senate passed a budget, despite the fact that it is one of Congress’ most important duties. Apparently, we did not need one in 2010, 2011, and 2012, so why do one for 2013?

We would ask why, but we know the answer, Obama and the Democrats want to make sure that in this election year, they do not want anything to ruin the ruse they created that Congress is tied up because of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party in the House.

A brilliant ploy, because the masses get confused easily when it comes to the budget, the debt, the debt ceiling, along with the lead anchors of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Just gut the military!

That plays into the hands of the Obama Campaign; keep them confused on difficult subjects, and feed them ‘baloney on rye’, otherwise known as class warfare and a re-directed focus.

Facts do not matter – only grandiose speeches filled with words like “fair”, “fat cats”, and “level playing field” will be heard from the left. Harry Reid is the master of double speak, and has never found a position he did not like as long as it promoted his “goal de jours”.

Why worry about some “stinking budget” when you have the Budget Control Act of 2011, conjured up on August 2, 2011. The same Act that the Democrat votes split right down the middle in the House so they could get the Republicans to pass it as a majority. How convenient! Imagine, a Federal Government that has no actual budget…wait, that’s what we have, how convenient indeed!

Don’t look behind that curtains America, its not pretty, and the left has hung some very pretty curtains to gawk at instead.

Reid: This year’s budget is done

By Vicki Needham

Senate majority Leader - Harry Reid D-Nevada - No 2013 Budget!

The Hill

Senate Democratic leaders said they don’t expect a fiscal 2013 budget to reach the floor this year because spending levels were set last summer under the debt-ceiling agreement.

“We do not need to bring a budget to the floor this year — it’s done, we don’t need to do it,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters on Friday, echoing previous statements from his office.

Reid and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued that the debt-limit agreement in August directs spending for the next year and that Senate Appropriations Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) has already asked the heads of the subcommittees to write their appropriations bills for fiscal 2013.

Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) has said he would probably mark up a budget resolution this year, but Reid said he didn’t expect any floor action on any measure produced by the panel.

A budget resolution serves as a blueprint for spending and isn’t signed by the president — it provides a broad outline for the Appropriations Committee for spending choices. The panel is required to follow the recommendations, although they tend to stick close to the overall discretionary spending figure.

Reid and Schumer said the outline already exists and an overall spending level is agreed to for the fiscal year 2013 bills. The committee will divide up $1.047 trillion in discretionary spending, with roughly half headed for the Defense Department.

The Pentagon is requesting $525 billion for fiscal 2013 with an additional $88.4 billion for overseas operations such as Afghanistan. This is decrease of $531 billion and $115 billion, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced last week.

Schumer said it is a “total falsity” for Republicans to say that Democrats haven’t passed the budget: “we passed it on Aug. 2.”

“They’re attacking us because they have nothing better to do,” Reid said. “They need something else to talk about.”

Commander-'Do-Nothing'-in-Chief – Party of 'Do-Nothings'

Editor’s Note – The Senate has a unique responsibility mandated by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344) which created the Senate Committee on the Budget, whose sole focus is the federal budget process, and the Congressional Budget Office, Congress’ budget “scorekeeper.”

The Senate has been controlled by the Democrat majority since 2007 and Senator Kent Conrad has chaired that committee since that change in majority status. Since the budget is their primary responsibility, why has there been no budget passed in the Senate in over 1,000 days?

Yet, the Senate is now prepared to pass a part of the budget, the Defense Department appropriation that may just get vetoed when it hits the Oval Office. Its no wonder the Congress has such low polling numbers on how it is doing its job, but that is disingenuous. Why? Because the Democrat Party has been in charge of the Senate for the entire term of Obama’s Presidency.

Now that the Republicans are in the majority in the House (11 months now), why is the moniker ‘do-nothing’ assigned by Obama to the Congress as a whole as if the Republicans have been in charge all the while?

The ‘do-nothings’ are the Democrats, and that has been the case since 2008. The country, especially the main stream media has a very short memory.

The true “Do-Nothing” entity is the Democrat Party, led by the Commander-‘Do-Nothing’-in-Chief, Barrack Obama. No wonder the world thinks we are paper tigers now.

Senate looks to wrap up work on defense bill


Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Senate moved methodically Thursday toward completing a massive defense bill that has drawn a presidential veto threat over increasing the role of the military in detaining terrorist suspects and indefinite detention of even American citizens linked to terrorism.

A final vote was expected late in the day on the $662 billion measure that would authorize funds for military personnel, weapons systems, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and national security programs in the Energy Department. The bill is $27 billion less than what President Barack Obama requested for the budget year beginning Oct. 1 and $43 billion less than what Congress provided to the Pentagon this year.

The Senate version still must be reconciled with a House-passed measure in the remaining few weeks of the congressional session.

Pitting the Senate against Obama’s national security team, led by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, and dividing Democrats are provisions in the bill on how to handle captured suspected terrorists. The escalating challenge reflects the ongoing political and constitutional fight over whether to treat terror suspects as prisoners of war or criminals, a tussle that has encompassed the nearly 3-old presidency of the Democratic commander in chief.

The White House has threatened a veto of the bill over the provisions, saying “this unnecessary, untested and legally controversial restriction of the president’s authority to defend the nation from terrorist threats would tie the hands of our intelligence and law enforcement professionals.” An administration that has killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden is resisting congressional meddling in its prosecution of the war on terror.

The bill would require military custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates and involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. It also would allow the government to hold an individual suspected of terrorism indefinitely, with no exception for a U.S. citizen.

The Senate was poised to vote on two amendments by Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein to change those provisions. One would prohibit the indefinite detention for a U.S. citizen without charges or a trial; the other would limit the military custody to those captured outside the United States.

“Due process is a basic right of this democracy,” Feinstein said during a sometimes heated debate on the bill Wednesday. “It is given to us because we are citizens of the United States. And due process requires that we do not authorize indefinite detention of our citizens.”

The California Democrat said the last time the government held U.S. citizens indefinitely was when Japanese-Americans were interned in camps during World War II.

Calling the United States a battlefield in the war on terror, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., countered that American citizens can be held as enemy combatants to gather intelligence.

It was unclear whether Feinstein would prevail. Earlier this week, the Senate resoundingly rejected an effort to strip the detainee provisions from the defense bill as just two Republicans – Kentucky’s Rand Paul and Illinois’ Mark Kirk – voted with Democrats. Several Democrats, specifically those facing re-election next year, broke with the leadership and the administration and voted to leave the provisions intact.

The Senate also was expected to overwhelmingly approve crippling sanctions on Iran as fears about Tehran developing a nuclear weapon outweighed concerns about driving up oil prices that would hit economically strapped Americans at the gas pump.

Last week, the administration announced a new set of penalties against Iran, including identifying for the first time Iran’s entire banking sector as a “primary money laundering concern.” This requires increased monitoring by U.S. banks to ensure that they and their foreign affiliates avoid dealing with Iranian financial institutions.

But lawmakers pressed ahead with even tougher penalties despite reservations by the administration.

Sens. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill., offered an amendment to the defense bill that would target foreign financial institutions that do business with the Central Bank of Iran, barring them from opening or maintaining correspondent operations in the United States. It would apply to foreign central banks only for transactions that involve the sale or purchase of petroleum or petroleum products.

The sanctions on petroleum would only apply if the president determines there is a sufficient alternative supply and if the country with jurisdiction over the financial institution has not significantly reduced its purchases of Iranian oil.

Testifying before the Foreign Relations Committee, David Cohen, a senior Treasury Department official, cautioned against steps that would “threaten to fracture the international coalition of nations committed to the dual-track approach, does not inadvertently redound to Iran’s economic benefit, and brings real and meaningful pressure to bear on Iran.”