New York Times Thinks A Constitutional Crisis Will Help Economy ( 14th Amendment Debt Limit Nonsense )

Either the NYT OP-Ed folks were drunk or distracted by Maureen Dowd doing a table dance at the meeting when they decided to write this piece up.

See End the Debt Limit

.....The debt limit should ideally be dispensed with, but, at a minimum, it can no longer be held for ransom. The president and Congress are free to continue talks to reduce the deficit, but not while the economy is dangling in the balance. The president should assemble a coalition of business leaders, mayors, governors and ordinary Americans ready to spend the next year explaining to voters why the debt limit should be eliminated, or blunted as a tool to change budgetary policy. If Democrats continuously remind the country how dangerous this path is, Republicans may think twice about repeating it.

If they do not, Mr. Obama could meet their challenge with a legal threat. The White House has repeatedly demurred when asked if a provision of the 14th Amendment could be used to declare the debt ceiling invalid, saying it was an untested theory. There is more than a year for administration lawyers to find ways to put it into practice.

The 14th Amendment, adopted during Reconstruction, says the validity of the public debt of the United States cannot be questioned. Threatening the economy with calamity to achieve partisan goals does just that. President Obama should use every power at his disposal to fend off Republicans’ irresponsible threats and invite them to meet him in court if they want to resist.

To meet him in Court ? Despite the fact that hardly no one of any credibility in the legal field ever thought a President could do this the NYT is supporting such a move.

It would grant to the Executive , as so many experts have noted, an unprecedented increase in power and who knows where it would end. If the NYT could think beyond next week they might realize that a ton of Democrats might jump ship. There is not just tension between political parties but BUILT IN DESIGNED tension between the branches. This would throw the whole system out of balance.

It would also cause Constitutional crisis and heck maybe some valid calls for Impeachment. Not sure the market needs that really.

Plus who would buy this "suspect" securties and at what price. What if the Court said Obama could not do it and thus the United States did not have to pay those illiegimate bonds? What would happen to our credit rating then?

Has the NYT thought about any of this?