The Debt Ceiling Debate at The New York Times

The New York Times | Opinion — Room for Debate
The Constitution
Neil H. Buchanan is an economist and professor of law at George Washington University Law School.

...the president must do the least damage, and that is by issuing enough debt to tax and spend as Congress ordered him to do.

The Priorities
Laurence H. Tribe is the Carl M. Loeb university professor and professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School.

The inadequacy of each of these alternatives highlights a truth I pointed out during the last debt-ceiling crisis: we cannot find solutions to all of society’s problems in the Constitution. Here, we must find them in political courage, in compromise and in a congressional willingness to fulfill its unique constitutional duties. Nothing else will avert the impending crisis.

The Law
Sarah Binder, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a professor of political science at George Washington University, is the author of, among other books, "Stalemate: Causes and Consequences of Legislative Gridlock."

...the creation of an aggregate debt limit in 1939 reflected Congressional deference to Treasury. Senate floor debates suggest that Congress created the debt ceiling to grant Treasury more flexibility in how it managed the desirable mix of debt instruments needed to support government borrowing. Rather than micromanaging the notes and bonds used to finance government obligations, Congress delegated those decisions to Treasury. In creating the debt ceiling, lawmakers recognized the limits of their financial know-how.

The Deal [Inquiring minds would like to know why is the prestigious Times giving this person free space to lobby for tax and social spending cuts?]
Maya MacGuineas is the president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and the head of the Campaign to Fix the Debt.

Congress should lift the debt ceiling as quickly as possible - no more 11th hour nail-biters please! -- while putting in place a comprehensive plan to bring the debt back down to manageable level.

The focus of the plan should be reforming the nation's entitlement programs that their own trustees have declared to be unsustainable. The changes should be gradual and protect those who depend on them, but align our promises with our ability to pay. Other parts of the budget from outdated programs (for instance, farm subsidies) to defense should be cut, and there needs to be a major overhaul of the outdated and anti-competitive tax code.

(Read cut social spending and cut taxes on business and the wealthy as "job creators" Deluded or duplicitous?)