So, if I read the Constitution correctly, Congress appropriates funds, and the Executive spends said funds.
And if monies are appropriated, that means the monies are ALREADY THERE to spend.
Can someone please explain to me why it is that Congress can appropriate money tor the Executive to spend, money that needs to be borrowed in the first place, BUT even though the money is ALREADY appropriated, still has to authorize the Executive to borrow the money to spend it?
It seems to me that if Congress appropriates money for programs then the Executive ALREADY has the authorization to borrow the money, debt ceiling be damned.
In fact, that was what the so-called "Gephardt Rule" was about. Any Congressional appropriation was matched by an equal increase in the debt ceiling.
So is this the President's strategy? Deliberately ignoring the obvious and then just announcing at the last moment that since Congress has already appropriated the money, he's going to spend it anyway. And in order for him to spend it he has to borrow the money, so Congressional approval to borrow the money was implicit in the appropriation as per the Gephardt Rule?