Stymied Obama aims to bypass Congress

natalia
reply to post by xuenchen

 

So basically what I'm getting out of this...is that Obama doesn't want to obey the laws anymore... He wants to just step over and do what he seems fit.
My heart sinks...literally sinks at the thought of this.

where does it say he will break laws?...tell us which ones, since you seem to be in the know about what he is going to do, and how he is going to do it.

Using EOs is fully within the law. Presidents should not use them all willy nilly though. So the question is, what exactly is he going to do? He can't create law, only Congress can. If he is creating laws here then we should be worried, if he is applying nuance to existing law, then it is pretty typical of a President and within Executive Powers but we should as always dissect the EOs and see what's up.

President Obama could support the worlds single greatest piece of legislation ever written in human history -- and the Republicans would still not allow it to pass into law.

When you're faced with gridlock like that, yeah...I can see why he's using EO's.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


That's pure fantasy. I could just as easily say if President Obama was willing to do something that benefitted the American people then he would have 100% bipartisan support. Who could disprove me?

Everything he has tried has been a train wreck for us from the beginning. What has he wanted to pass that should have been supported? Amnesty? Obamacare? Support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya and Syria? Lies about o dead Ambassador? What plan should the Republicans sign on to that is beneficial to the American people?

MystikMushroom
President Obama could support the worlds single greatest piece of legislation ever written in human history -- and the Republicans would still not allow it to pass into law.

When you're faced with gridlock like that, yeah...I can see why he's using EO's.

Democracy in action!


Just like the Republicans could write the greatest piece of legislation in human history and the Democrats would not let it pass.

People were wailing "dictator" when Bush essentially said the same, remember?

So...why do poeple give Obama a pass? Is he really that pathetic?

reply to post by burntheships

So...why do poeple give Obama a pass? Is he really that pathetic?

Because Obama is from the party of can't do anything,wrong, EVER.

And it is always someone elses fault.

Even though his party controls 2/3's of government,

And them evil Republicans were put in to power for this exact reason.

To stop them.

MystikMushroom
President Obama could support the worlds single greatest piece of legislation ever written in human history -- and the Republicans would still not allow it to pass into law.

When you're faced with gridlock like that, yeah...I can see why he's using EO's.

It always works both ways it seems.

Even Bush submitted a health plan to a Democrat controlled Congress.

And that was kaput. Then the Democrats passed their own with zero Republican support.

Strange how checks & balances works. Go figure.

How George W. Bush Would Have Replaced Obamacare

neo96
Even though his party controls 2/3's of government,

And them evil Republicans were put in to power for this exact reason.

To stop them.

Exactly Neo,

Yes, the president can use EO's yet the founders intent
with the House and Senate was to employ "checks and balances" to prevent tyranny.

What we have here is a president who does not want to carry
out his sworn oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution.
rather he just wants to advance his progressive socialist agenda.


The Presidential Oath of Office

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Kali74
Using EOs is fully within the law. Presidents should not use them all willy nilly though. So the question is, what exactly is he going to do? He can't create law, only Congress can. If he is creating laws here then we should be worried, if he is applying nuance to existing law, then it is pretty typical of a President and within Executive Powers but we should as always dissect the EOs and see what's up.

Exactly right, "He can't create law..."

Although there is no constitutional provision nor statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. An executive order of the President must find support in the Constitution, either in a clause granting the President specific power, or by a delegation of power by Congress to the President.
...executive orders are subject to judicial review, and may be struck down if deemed by the courts to be unsupported by statute or the Constitution.

en.wikipedia.org...

It's the Judicial review or lack there of that gets me thinking about all the power the last two presidents have amassed through expansion of the departments in the executive branch with the likes of the Homeland Security, NSA, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice, etc.

What kinda dirt or leverage does he have on the the Justices that are supposed to subject his orders to judicial review?

"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" -George Orwell - Animal Farm

reply to post by MystikMushroom


interestingly it goes both ways and that has been for decades. Is checks and balances, is a reason why people choose to increase the majority of members by party in either house, to keep presidents and opposing parties at bay from becoming tyrants.

But its also very interesting to see how people complaint when the favorite parties are the ones been in the spot light due to majority in the house or senate of the opposing parties.

But like I say it happens every elections and affects both parties equally.

The way the present administration is doing this days, I will not be surprised that the opposing party will get both house and senate majority, because that is the only way that the people is telling the ruling party that enough is enough.

Checks and balances nothing more and nothing else in a nation with a democratic process

The founding fathers were geniuses.

reply to post by marg6043

The founding fathers were geniuses.

Yep and today it's ran by idiots.

shaneslaughta
Would it not be an impeachable offense if he bypasses congress? His bypassing the system built to keep one from amassing too much power. What are the limits on his bypassing abilities?

They're called executive orders...

reply to post by neo96


Its ran by idiots and political whores once the private interest was able to buy them and lure them with corrupted money.

Still we the people know exactly how corrupted our politics are but we still dream that voting one party over the other one and rotating them will fix the problem, because we are exercising our voting rights.

Wishful thinking, specially when the trash we call politicians this days get recycle every election time.

reply to post by Visitor2012


Executives orders can act as laws, but only if the congress is complaiant with them, as congress and courts have the right to stop and kill them

Executive Orders: The Power of the President’s Pen

Article II: Power to the POTUS

An executive order (E.O.) is one type of a presidential directive. Article II of the U.S. Constitution doesn’t mention executive orders, but it does provide an expansive mandate in stating that “[t]he executive power shall be vested in a President….” This is a broad grant of power and is the basis for presidents’ power to invoke executive orders. The orders are laws of “of general applicability and legal effect.” The term “executive order” was not a part of the political lexicon until 1862, when such orders where formalized by a counting system beginning with “1” (President Bush signed Executive Order 13477 on October 31, 2008). A signed order is published in the Federal Register and generally remains in effect until superseded by another order, although some orders are written to expire at a prescribed time.

The Executive is not a Legislator…

…Nor is he Above the Law

www.thelegality.com...

They are only enforced if congress and the courts allowed them to be enforced.

reply to post by MonkeyMentat


I'm not sure there's lack of judicial review.

I dunno, I'm far more worried about what Congress passes in agreement with Obama than EOs. The TPP looks like it will be fast tracked :/

jude11
reply to post by xuenchen

 

So why have Congress at all?

Seems to me that a Dictator can steal more money simply by owning up to the fact that he is in fact a Dictator.

Don't worry about it Obama...if the people haven't ousted you by now they never will. Looks like you have a free pass to steal, lie, cheat, kill...with impunity.

Peace

I agree with you, but I think his focus is on his legacy now, and making sure that Dems hold their seats. This is a good read;

Even though Obama will never face the voters again, he has plenty of incentive to boost his game. Now he's playing for his legacy, and the judgment of the history books. Politically, he's playing for the final national election of his presidency – next November's midterms, in which Democratic control of the Senate is at risk. Reclaiming the House from the Republicans is close to impossible. Divided government is Obama's near-certain reality for the rest of his presidency.

Obama, a former constitutional law professor, was once skeptical of the aggressive use of presidential power. During the 2008 campaign, he accused President George W. Bush of regularly circumventing Congress. Yet as president, Obama has grown increasingly bold in his own use of executive action, at times to controversial effect.

And I had to add this;

Restoring public confidence in Obama's trustworthiness and competence as an executive is also critical, as the president tries to move beyond the "Obamacare" fiasco and National Security Agency snooping. Republicans are already firmly lashing the health reform's woes to Democratic candidates' necks. But nothing will impress voters more than a sense that their personal financial situation is improving. Cue Obama's focus on what he calls "the defining challenge of our time," growing inequality and a lack of upward mobility. It will be a central theme in the State of the Union message, including a call for Congress to boost the federal minimum wage.

Link

natalia

shaneslaughta
Would it not be an impeachable offense if he bypasses congress? His bypassing the system built to keep one from amassing too much power. What are the limits on his bypassing abilities?

That's exactly what I was just thinking... Can he not be impeached for these actions??
This seems to be getting out of hand.

Obama won't do anything that he WILL be impeached for. You can rest assured, him and his advisors, have "thought about that."

Can be impeached and will be, are two very different things.

muse7
The president has executive actions and executive orders, those are powers that he can use to bypass congress, and I'm sure he has a team of advisers advising him on just that.

This is a do nothing congress, and someone needs to get the ball rolling.

I support him

I fully agree with you. There has GOT to be something in the law, Constitution or otherwise, that when the United States Congress fails to act, the Executive Branch not only can, but MUST.