Re:USDC's Circle Moves $8.7B to Repo Agreements to Protect R...
by makomk on Thursday May 18, 2023 @11:32AM
(#35989450)
Having such a permanent law would be constitutionally iffy. The power to borrow money that is part of the US national debt is specifically reserved for Congress, and this is essentially part of what makes the United States a democracy in the first place: only the body made up of the country's elected representatives can tax and borrow in the name of the country. (Other countries have similar restrictions, though not necessarily debt caps; for example, in the UK Parliament must passs a budget each year or the government effectively cannot finance itself and continue operating. This would probably not work well in the USA because Congress has trouble passing budgets reliably.)
Re:USDC's Circle Moves $8.7B to Repo Agreements to Protect R...
by JumpCrisscross on Thursday May 18, 2023 @03:13PM
(#35992686)
You’d include it the language in the budget. When the Congress actually has a choice as to whether or not to spend the money. Doing it after a contract has been issued and the bill is due is asinine.
It was for efficiency:
"Between 1788 and 1917, Congress would authorize each bond issue by the United States Treasury by passing a legislative act that approved the issue and the amount.
In 1917, during World War I, Congress created the debt ceiling with the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917, which allowed the Treasury to issue bonds and take on other debt without specific Congressional approval, as long as the total debt fell under the statutory debt ceiling" [1].
There is no original sin. We just need a law that permanently authorizes the Treasury to borrow as needed to pay for the things the Congress told it to spend on.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_d...