In less than four weeks, America will hit the deadline for deciding to raise the debt ceiling. While it seems that the debt ceiling will be raised, the argument remains over what spending cuts and budget reforms would be attached to the increase, and how to placate credit rating agencies like Moody's and S&P that threatened to downgrade America's perfect credit rating if adequate spending reforms are not made.

However, a new proposal coming from the administration states that the debt ceiling must be raised by order of the Constitution, and that the President can pay America's bills without congressional approval. Some members of the political left argue that the 14th Amendment, which states that the United States' right to incur debt "shall not be questioned," which means that President Obama can borrow money without needing congressional approval, and instructs the Treasury to pay America's debt regardless of Congress' consent.  The argument has been made by people as close to Obama as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

In an op-ed for the Washington Post, Katrina vanden Heuvel calls this solution a "necessary" response to the impasse, and states that the President has a moral obligation to invoke the 14th Amendment if the situation warrants. Doing so, however, would be politically risky, as Ms. vanden Heuvel admits. It would set a dangerous precedent regarding executive authority to bypass Congress on spending matters, which many in this country and in government look unfavorably upon to say the least. It would also mean Washington could borrow as much as it wanted without any checks or balances on the practice, which is what the debt ceiling is supposed to be.

The Libyan conflict entered its 90th day last Sunday, the last day for a President to order military action in a foreign country without reporting to Congress under the rules of the War Powers Act.

According to the legislation, the President must end military involvement unless Congress authorizes its continuation. However, President Obama declared that he does not need to go to Congress in this situation because the "hostilities" described in the War Powers Act do not apply to the situation in Libya. Despite this position taken by the administration, there are still disagreements among the members of the President's legal team, especially from Pentagon Counsel Jeh Johnson and Caroline Krass, acting head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, who claim America's involvement in the NATO-led air campaign to be subject to the discretion of the War Powers Act.

In response to this lack of Congressional approval, there is a bi-partisan lawsuit being issued against President Obama that is making its way to Federal Court. The lawsuit, which has the support of anti-war congressmen Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Ron Paul (R-Texas), aims to force the President to withdraw US forces from the NATO operation in Libya, claiming that the intervention is unconstitutional due to the President's failure to notify Congress about the involvement. So far, our intervention in the Libyan civil war is costing the taxpayers $10 million per day, and the conditions in that country continue to deteriorate as the battle has ground to a bloody stalemate. More at www.silverunderground.com.

We've had a dearth of Southern Avenger videos on the YAL blog of late, which I am remedying now.  Here's Jack Hunter's two most recent videos, the first on Obama's "out-bushing Bush" and the second on the (hopefully ending) era of 9/11 foreign policy.  Read the text of both videos and catch up on his other recent posts here.

Writes YAL member Tony Peterson in his campus paper:

Earlier this month, President Barack Obama, unsurprisingly, announced his bid to keep the same job for four more years. Though the president hasn’t had exactly what you could call a smooth first term, he will be a formidable foe to the Republican nominee.

And just who might that Republican be?

Answer: nobody knows.

Read the whole article here.