Jack Balkin — How Obama Can Prevent Another Debt-Ceiling Crisis

Some Democrats want the president to raise it by himself. But the 14th amendment offers him a much better strategy....

The moral of the story is simple: The best way for Obama to head off Republican threats of another debt ceiling crisis is to make his position clear at the outset. First, he should explain that he won't bargain with hostage takers. Second, he should make clear that he won't let Congress off the hook by raising the debt ceiling himself. Obama has now made both of these statements publicly. Third, he should state clearly that if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling he will continue to pay all of the nation's debts as required by the Constitution. Fourth, he should make clear that he will continue to do so even if this means curtailing or shutting down government functions until Congress comes to its senses.

If Obama does all these things, he will be in the strongest possible bargaining position. And he will also be following the Constitution.

The Atlantic
How Obama Can Prevent Another Debt-Ceiling Crisis
Jack M. Balkin | Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment at Yale Law School
(h/t Kevin Fathi via email)

John Carney— The $1 Trillion Coin Solution to the Debt Ceiling

Yale’s constitutional law professor Jack Balkin has some innovative ideas about how to get around the debt ceiling. 

Read it at CNBC NetNet
The $1 Trillion Coin Solution to the Debt Ceiling

by John Carney | Senior Editor

Great that Jack Balkin is on board, but it was beowulf who proposed the idea initially and Joe Firestone who pushed it, and Balkin does give credit to "some commentators."

But, let's face it, Balkin's backing makes it likely that the president's team will pick it up and at least consider it.

Note that Prof. Balkin also asserts, "The "jumbo coin" and "exploding option" strategies work because modern central banks don't have to print bills or float debt to create new money; they just add money [reserves] to their customers' checking accounts [at the Fed with a few keystrokes]."

Jack Balkin — Popular Constitutionalism and the 2012 Election

Watch Jack Balkin's keynote address at a conference on "Popular Constitutionalism and the 2012 Election" held at Roger Williams Law School in Bristol, Rhode Island.

Here is his summary:

A few weeks back I gave a keynote address at a conference on "Popular Constitutionalism and the 2012 Election" held at Roger Williams Law School in Bristol, Rhode Island. A video of the talk, which runs about an hour, is posted below. It discusses different theories of popular and democratic constitutionalism, and explains why presidents are so important to constitutional transformation. Drawing on Stephen Skowronek's work, it also analyzes the Obama Presidency as a preemptive presidency. A preemptive president-- examples are Cleveland, Wilson, Nixon and Clinton--is one who is swimming against the tide of the current constitutional regime and the politics of the time. As Skowronek explains, preemptive presidents look "for reconstructive possibilities without clear warrant for breaking cleanly with the past." (The Politics Presidents Make, at p. 44).

Viewing Obama as a preemptive president explains two curious facts about his administration which seem to be in tension with each other and have puzzled many political commentators.

First, Obama has not been on the leading edge of constitutional change, but has largely worked within the parameters of the Reagan regime. As a result, his liberal colleagues have often been very disappointed in him, despite his major accomplishments both in foreign affairs and in domestic policy.

Second, despite his moderate tone and his often stated desire to transcend partisanship, his opponents in the Republican Party have acted as if Obama is engaged in a full-scale constitutional revolution that they believe will subvert the foundations of the American Constitution.

It is a curious fact of preemptive presidents like Nixon or Clinton that although they routinely compromise and take moderate positions that often disappoint members of their own party, their political opponents become ever more outraged at everything they do. This explains how a president like Barack Obama, widely regarded as a sell-out by many liberals, has nevertheless been viewed by his opponents as a secret Muslim, a crypto-radical, and a scheming manipulator (i.e., a "Chicago politician") who is promoting a "secular socialist agenda" that will forever destroy liberty in the United States. Obama's policy of moderation and conciliation--like that of other preemptive presidents--has only succeeded in further radicalizing his opponents, leading to an election that in some respects resembles 1972 or 1996. 

Perhaps Obama will turn out to be a transformative president after all, (think Andrew Jackson's second term). Nevertheless, even if Obama sought to be a transformative president in his second term, it is possible that what Skowronek calls the thickening of political institutions has introduced so many veto points into the system--for example, the Senate and the role of money in elections--and so greatly narrowed the window for genuine change that real transformation may be difficult in our current era.

Read it at Balkinization

The Constitution and the 2012 Election

by Jack Balkin | Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment at Yale Law School

Balkin — Corporations and the Thirteenth Amendment

How the Thirteen Amendment could be used against "corporate personhood" if interpreted as broadly as the Fourteenth.

Read it at Balkinization
Corporations and the Thirteenth Amendment
by jb

Thirteen Amendment
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

UPDATE:
More on Corporations as Slaves
by JB

Jack Balkin backs coin seigniorage, exploding options and the 14th Amendment

Knight Professor of Constitutional Law at Yale Law School Jack M. Balkin has an op/ed at CNN analyzing the effect of potenial default, the president's constitutional obligations, and three options for avoiding default, using coin seigniorage or exploding options, or invoking the 14th Amendment.

3 ways Obama could bypass Congress

Congratulations Beowulf and Joe Firestone. This has now broken into the mainstream.

(h/t commentator TomatoBasil)