Pelosi 'Clearly' Backs 14th Amendment Option In Debt Standoff, Congressman Reports

WASHINGTON -- House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) may not be pushing the issue publicly, but in private she "clearly" supports President Barack Obama using the Constitution to raise the debt ceiling as a last resort, according to one Democratic member of Congress.

"Nancy clearly wants it," said the lawmaker, who requested anonymity. "Publicly? No. Privately? She thinks the president should do it. Period."

Several top Democrats have endorsed the idea in recent days as an eleventh hour solution: House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) backed the option on Wednesday, and House Democratic Caucus chairman John Larson (D-Conn.) and Assistant Minority Leader James Clyburn (D-S.C.) emerged from a Monday Caucus meeting announcing their support for the idea as well.

But Pelosi, the highest-ranking House Democrat, has been mum. One possible reason is that she has to preserve the image that Congress will reach a deal before the situation even gets to that point.

The provision at the heart of the constitutional debate, Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, states: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payments of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” Essentially, Democrats are arguing that since the "public debt" cannot be questioned, then the debt ceiling itself is unconstitutional.

A Pelosi aide said he hasn't heard the Minority Leader endorse the constitutional option to any lawmakers. "But who knows," said the aide. "Our official line is her energy is focused on getting a balanced deal."

That "deal," of course, remains nonexistent. Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) met with Obama for nearly two hours on Saturday afternoon, shortly after the House voted down Reid's debt ceiling proposal. Reid took to the Senate floor afterward to knock Republicans for refusing to negotiate and said "the process has not been moved forward during this day."

The crumbling state of discussions over how to raise the debt ceiling by August 2, when the government is expected to run out of money to pay its bills, is causing a growing number of Democrats to nervously turn their attention to the constitutional option as a possible way of averting default. Meanwhile, the White House insists the option remains off the table, citing concerns with Obama's legal authority to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval.

The issue "came up" during a Democratic Caucus meeting on Saturday, Del. Donna Christensen (D-Virgin Islands) told The Huffington Post, but was not considered a viable option "for today."

"It's one I don't like, and I know the president has said he doesn't like," said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.). "But if that's what it takes to prevent the country from catastrophic default, I think at the very last minute, I think that's something the president's going to have to consider."

When asked if he is optimistic that Congress can reach a deal by August 2, Connolly replied with a resounding "no."

"I think we're coming down the wire and the other side is essentially enthralled to a very narrow orthodoxy that doesn't allow them, ultimately, to recognize their obligations to the United States," he said. "I'm very concerned about that."

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the former chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, charged forward on Saturday, filing a resolution with a group of progressive Democrats calling on Obama to take the constitutional route as a last resort.

"I think it's essential" that Obama be prepared to invoke the 14th Amendment, Nadler told The Huffington Post. "I'm dubious that anybody can come to any agreement that can pass both houses."

Asked if such action would only give ammunition to critics ready to call for Obama's impeachment -- this time for potentially violating the Constitution -- Nadler replied, "Let them try. Let them try."

The New York Democrat wondered aloud how much of the president's insistence that the option is off the table is for show, given that he needs to convey that the situation won't come to that point.

"It's something he should say," Nadler said of Obama's rejection of the 14th Amendment option. "But the fact is, legally, I think it's doable."

The increasing anxiety about an endgame was evident during Saturday's House debate. In the minutes before the House rejected Reid's debt proposal, some Democrats used their floor time to urge Obama to step in.

"The president needs to pull the 14th Amendment," Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said. "I think he should, because the Republicans have shown no sign of compromise."

Comments

[Lewisermer]

08:47 PM on 08/04/2011

What does it matter? This is the same BS that has been going on for years......The thing about it is that congress is nothing more than a magic show and their job is to get you to believe it ...The AMERICAN people need to wake up, it is time as always before to take this country back....But no we just sit and wait for the next magic trick and smile ....I find it strange that their cuts are always on the american people, has anyone heard of them taking any cuts? with power comes greed and congress is nothing more then greed and show boating at its best....look at congress and look at the doors they have opened up for their family and friends....dig deeper and look at the perks they get in around about way....I have and will post them soon, and it will turn you inside out...the things they think no one knows we do they leave a trail.....So the final thought is no matter what side your on and who you think is right ( YOUR GETTING SCREWED) and all those little rats on capital hill have their hands in your back pocket after all they get the same pay check every week but you won't....

[brockj661]

01:25 PM on 08/03/2011

once again as I said before Pelosi is the best example of what is wrong with our elected officials,shesays publicly one thing,than supposedly another privately,which are both publicly released,the whole time she thinks she is actually stating her case and making a point,doesnt get much better than her!!!!

[gulamon]

07:30 PM on 08/02/2011

Why is this thread even active??? Forget the 14th!!! It's over, and the 14th was never a credible option.

[yb35]

08:56 AM on 08/02/2011

well siscod I hate to tell you where Nasty P should go too I am an Independent voter and even if she were the only choice I would pick none of the above

[yb35]

08:53 AM on 08/02/2011

Well its obvious wall1969 that you must be a free loader and thats the party to be with

[Darfur Deng]

01:33 AM on 08/02/2011

The reason the President is treating the 14th like a contagious disease, and is dodging the selective ignorance of Congress, can be found in the wording deliberately omitted to sell it as a viable option

"The validity of the nation's public debt "shall not be questioned." What they always selectively excluded is what qualifies the public debts validity to "not be questioned"

"The validity of the nation's public debt, AUTHORIZED BY LAW shall not be questioned." One would think that those who proclaim such scholarly knowledge of our Constitutions lawful bounds would notice that every call to invoke the 14th conveniently leaves out this qualifying reference to our laws when citing its legal grounds

Nowhere in the 14th does it grant the President the power.

Section 5: The CONGRESS SHALL HAVE POWER TO ENFORCE,

There are no constitutional clauses or amendments, nor codified laws that authorize the payment of trillions in unaccounted FED funds claimed as debt, much less authorizing payment of interest on such funds.

The fact that such money is literally created out of thin air makes it unacceptable that it be allowed to vanish back into that from whence it came, solely based upon the word of a private institution comprised of nothing more than megalomaniacal kleptomaniacs.

The 14th Amendment could only be applied to current debt, not new debt. The Debt Ceiling is based on paying current debt, as well as for future debt not yet incurred, nullifying that provision in the 14th.

[jcm024]

11:56 PM on 08/01/2011

This is comical...LIBERALS..all you preached for years was deficit, war, deficit, war..
What happened, were those issues only important when Bush was in the office?
You people do not care about the country..if you did, you'd be TRASHING Obama now for the same reasons that you trashed Bush. I was one of the first people to ever complain about Bush! the ironic part is that his Presidency began to slide when he began governing like a Liberal.

[cutsonpaints]

06:51 PM on 08/01/2011

I hope the voters remember all these names come election time. Pelosi, Hoyer, Nadler, Durbin and the others ALL need to go. Regardless of party affiliation MOST American people with a functional brain cell can understand we just CANNOT continue to spend more than we make. Kind of like buying a car you cant afford on the hope that you will get a raise to pay for it. Good luck with that one. Man I don't really consider myself a tea partier but they sure are on to something. Vote em all out and vote in new ones with cuts in pensions, medical, and salaries, then top it off with term limitations

[Phyllis Kunz]

02:33 PM on 08/01/2011

I am confused about the 14 Amendment. Totally. And would appreciate feedback on this
amendment. According to my notes, which are barely legible, the 14th amendment
was confirmed in the Senate January 18, 2009 However, it concerned "citizen of the
U.S.A. and zeroed in on Pres. Obama and Sen. McCain So which is it: the debt or
qualification for the presidency and the Senate.
Hopefully, it will be proved that Sen. Rand Paul is from Pluto and not qualified for
the Senate and AG Jack Conway is a shoo-in. Have a nice day, all, and thanks Phyllis

[cobra68]

12:56 PM on 08/01/2011

Is it that the Republicans won't talk to the author of this article or that the author just doesn't consider their input important enough to contribute to the facts. Sure would like to see some articles representing all sides of the debate, so we can make an intelligent decision.

[cutsonpaints]

07:11 PM on 08/01/2011

Cobra. You're apparently new here so here it is. I access the HUff through AOL. Until...right around January of this year AOL used independent news sources. Politics Daily and several others. THEN they formed an alliance with the Huff which is basically known for political bias and support of liberal principles. LAst week AOL stock hit an all time low and I suppose they can't figure out why. I'm looking at new sources of providers myself after....gotta be 15 years nearly

[cobra68]

07:28 AM on 08/02/2011

Yes I am new here. As you said, I have been using AOL as my home page for many many years slao. I'm now looking for its replacement but the format has always been very good. The news presentation has now reached a point that I feel I'm supporting this nonsense presented by the Obama Media Group. Thank you for your response.

[irichman]

10:29 AM on 08/01/2011

Obama should invoke the 14th amendment. Let's see if he has any guts. The Republicans are in the minority and cannot dictate terms.
Ilene Richman

[DKK77]

11:58 AM on 08/01/2011

He just better be sure that he has the Constitutional power to do that. Otherwise, he will find himself in the same position he put Bush's adminstration when he sent Eric Holder to "investigate" the interrogation techniques. What goes around comes around, Bama.

[CornellDublier]

10:16 AM on 08/01/2011

The 14th Amendment is GOLDEN Use it and crush these over paid political w.r.a.n.k.e.r.s.

[basta]

09:54 AM on 08/01/2011

According to the Constitution, the government is supposed to be the sole printer of money. There should be any debt at all. Eliminate the Fed and take back control of our money.

[HuffPostFlamingLiberals]

09:49 AM on 08/01/2011

There she is, going all transparent and bi-partisan on us again. Just like when the GOP helped her create 'the bill that needed to be passed so we can find out what's in it".

[pinkrose4ann]

08:52 AM on 08/01/2011

There is no deal. This is a Tea Party Manifesto. Invoke the 14th amendment or we need to primary Obama. Enough is enough. Stop selling out your own party.

[DKK77]

09:24 AM on 08/01/2011

oh yes, there is. your party does NOT want to lose the next election