Shortly after noon today, MSNBC's Contessa Brewer followed her colleague Chuck Todd in using the anniversary of the 14th Amendment becoming law to cite the liberal fantasy of a clause in the amendment empowering President Obama to end-run Congress on raising the debt ceiling.
Like Todd she got her history and the text of the relevant clause wrong.
This occurred during a satellite interview with Rep. Elliot Engel (D-N.Y.) on the debt ceiling debate (video follows page break; MP3 audio available here):
BREWER: Let me ask you about another angle this could take. On this date in 1868 the 14th Amendment was adopted into the Constitution. [Rep.] James Clyburn [D-S.C.] is raising the prospect once again of the president using that amendment to raise the debt ceiling on his own without congressional approval.
The amendment says in part "the validity of public debt shall not be questioned." The White House has essentially said look, it's not applicable to this problem. Is there a bigger role for the president in breaking this impasse?
Of course, Engel is a huge proponent of such an unconstitutional end-run, so he took the opportunity to then plug his press conference to be held later in the day with other liberal Democrats calling on President Obama to attempt such a maneuver.
But Brewer misquoted Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, which reads in full (emphasis mine):
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution reserves to Congress the power to loan money on the credit of the United States and no amendment changes that. The president cannot unilaterally raise the debt ceiling and thereby loan more money on credit of the United States than Congress has assented to. Indeed, even liberal constitutional scholars like Laurence Tribe have dismissed the idea as unconstitutional and as setting a dangerous precedent if pursued.
As to the history of the 14th Amendment's adoption, while it's true that on July 28, 1868 U.S. Secretary of State William Seward issued a proclamation recognizing that the 14th Amendment had been officially ratified, it was 19 days earlier on July 9 that the amendment was actually adopted, when South Carolina's legislature voted for ratification.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution makes perfectly clear that proposed amendments "shall be valid to all intents and purposes...when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths" of the states.
For a network that repeatedly slams Tea Party conservatives for an alleged sloppy command of history and/or ignorance of the Constitution, it sure could use some brushing up on those subjects.
# # #
