Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Using an Executive Order to pass legislation! UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 5 oClock
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


I'm just getting more disgusted EVERY SINGLE DAY. I've work hard my whole life for what I have, never sucked the Gov. tit for ANYTHING.
To see this country going where were heading, I just want to stop contributing to the system, sit on my arse and start suckling the Gov. tit.

Screw it, let them pass every piece of crap legislation and let's just get it on.

2 party system.


Works for me, fly under the radar,




posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Healthcare as a whole is a vicious cycle. First you have the huge cost to having anything done for you health wise. The costs have become so bloated that hospitals charge 90 dollars for a box of Kleenex, and call them mucus retrieval system. That in itself needs to be changed and the hospital corporations need to become more honest about costs. Only problem is the cost of healthcare has gone up because of medical malpractice lawsuits and the doctors needing malpractice insurance. Well if their premiums go up so does their cost for their services. Well, most of the malpractice lawsuits are probably bogus along with some of them being totally legitimate. So, it comes down to personal accountability and not abusing the systems that are in place. People need to realize that they don't need to be going into the emergency room with a sniffle on a Sunday, and they just need to wait a day and see their normal doctor at a normal time. Makes a huge difference when it comes to claims, that way, insurance premiums can stay at a level that people can afford. Most do not realize that when we had our companies paying benefits and we were only paying 25 bucks for a 200 dollar deductible, the company was paying something like 100 bucks a month for you to have that. Most people didn’t realize what they had and what the companies were paying for them to have those kinds of premiums.

anyway im rambling, and dont have time to put a well thought out post. but just thought I would put in some thought into the discussion....

Government hands out of my jar of cookies, now!



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Well, not talking about Executive Orders only.

I am talking about the President using an Executive Order to sidestep language in legislation in Congress.

The House Reps had a problem with the Senate version, so instead of it going back to the Senate, Obama promises that he will execute an EO.

Yes, everything in regards to EO's I find abhorrent.

ALL OF THEM WW! Not just Obama's everyone of them in perpetuity. ALL OF THEM.

The system of our government was the 3 branches. Sorry, I find our country to be going down the road of a dictatorship. The power is getting funneled to the Executive Branch. There is no longer the separation required.

Welcome to the new US of A.


Congress has the EXCLUSIVE power to make laws.




Basis in U.S. Constitution
U.S. Presidents have issued Executive Orders since 1789. Although there is no Constitutional provision or 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 4. At the minimum, most Executive Orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties,[1] the intent being to help direct officers of the US Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the Federal Government - the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.[2]


wiki link

The power of the Executive Order should be interpreted exclusively pertaining to existing presidential power. That is, only to enforce existing laws.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Except Bush did that too. Remember the auto bailout? There was no way he could get it through Congress so he just signed an EO.

Weedwhacker pegged most of you on this. Obama isn't doing anything Bush didn't.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Sorry for my off-topic rant earlier but why don't THE REPUBLICAN tea-baggers ever criticise big-pharma and their monopolistic prising within the american market?

Why is it always the democrats fault if they want universal healthcare for everyone because the pricing of hospitalisation and medication is TOO HIGH in regards to salary/wages earned? Who are the real hypocrites here?

Why is it ok to spend trillions of dollars on foreign imperialistic wars and covert black projects within the usa but NOT OK to spend money on healthcare and social security? Do you guys realise that republicans want to push SS to 70? Hell they might as well make you die first and then give the benefits to survivng members of the deceased.

[edit on 21-3-2010 by EarthCitizen07]



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


As you can see by an earlier post of mine, I find ALL EO's abhorrent.

What I am saying on this thread though, is the use of an EO to get legislation through Congress.

Is that not the Executive Branch manipulating the Legislative Branch?

reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


No problems, I rant you rant we all rant!


And if you have read ANY of my threads that I mention the wars, you will see that I am a Libertarian and think we should NOT be in the business of policing the world.

I think you have me mistaken for a Neo Con.

So, thanks for the comments and address the OP.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


So I guess my question is if you want steak, why settle for spam?

This bill has no provisions of being a gateway to UHC, in fact passage may end all future discussion on that subject. They could have adopted a public option in the nearly 3000 pages, but refused. They could have scrapped the bill altogether and allowed for private purchase options into Medicare, thus coming close to eliminating Medicaid to all but the absolute poor and children in poverty, but they did not do that either.

To me it would seem, that they want the controls over individuals that HCR gives them. As well as unlimited access to your medical and financial records. Just try working under the table now for a few bucks or hiring a teenager to do some babysitting or lawn mowing.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Yes, that is my new motto. Who am I to try and fight the beast. I will just not ever feed it again!

The beast can be starved, just use your wits though.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   
I am somewhat disappointed in the trend to think that if people didn't complain when Bush did it, they shouldn't complain when Obama does it.

That is precisely the dualism that keeps us thinking there is a difference between the two.

The topic itself is "Using an Executive Order to pass legislation! UNCONSTITUTIONAL?".

Everyone deserves the latitude to establish a link between the heathcare bill (which is implicitly the topic of the thread) and the politician's who are the 'players' in the matter.

But exactly how does the phrase "Bush did it too." make it more or less constitutional?



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


oh I agree.

I would pull all of our troops out of other countries. I would put them to work for businesses and corporations here in the states until there term of service is over. that would include policing the borders for illegals. I think if companies and small businesses had a choice between free troops to work for them versus illegals that they have to pay for they would choose the first option. I would also make it so that our service men and women would have first dibs on the job they have been doing for the businesses when their military contract is up. This in no way has to do with any of our service personal having the power to police the country but to reinforce our infustructure. Obviously businesses that employ our military after the contract is over will gain bonuses to retaining those men and women. This not only strengthens and promotes production in the US instead of all the consumerism, but would likely led to getting rid of our illegal alien problem. Have you seen the DOD budget? Ya, we could get rid of most of that too and curb that spending. Out deficit would go away very quickly even cutting the DOD budget down by 1/2.

it really comes down to removing the corruption from government and getting people in place that do right by people. Good luck finding those...



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


My comments were not directed to you as such. They were directed to the republican tea party movement who threaten to use violence only when democrats are in office.

On the surfuce they want change but I really doubt its the change everyone was looking forward to. Its more of a "don't tax me" and "I hate big government" revolution that ignores many key issues.

Mod edit above in italics: Please review thread reaffirming our desire for productive political debate

[edit on 3/21/2010 by yeahright]



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Yes, that is my new motto. Who am I to try and fight the beast. I will just not ever feed it again!

The beast can be starved, just use your wits though.


Amen my brother, seems my whole life was lived for this moment,



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Thanks Maxmars for keeping us on the straight and narrow.

I still am wondering if this maneuver has been used before.

I am currently watching CSPAN and DAMN I wish I could have about 1:25 to state my case on this component.

I find that the DC crooks are using every means necessary to pass this monstrosity.

I find it analogous to the Federal Reserve Act.

Anyway, thanks for your comments.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Except Bush did that too. Remember the auto bailout? There was no way he could get it through Congress so he just signed an EO.

Weedwhacker pegged most of you on this. Obama isn't doing anything Bush didn't.


Main problem is that Bush didn't do an Executive Order for the auto bailout.


In September, 2008 the Big Three asked for $50 billion to pay for health care expenses and avoid bankruptcy and ensuing layoffs, and Congress worked out a 25$ billion loan.[96] By December, President Bush had agreed to an emergency bailout of $17.4 billion to be distributed by the next administration in January and February.[97] In early 2009, the prospect of avoiding bankruptcy by General Motors and Chrysler continued to wane as new financial information about the scale of the 2008 losses came in. Ultimately, poor management and business practices forced Chrysler and General Motors into bankruptcy. Chrysler filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on May 1, 2009 [98] followed by General Motors a month later.[99]

Source.

EDIT: Here's the story on the 17.4 billion.


December 19, 2008
President Bush on Friday unveiled a long-awaited plan aimed at helping the struggling U.S. auto industry avoid bankruptcy and massive layoffs that could deepen the nation's recession, offering carmakers $17.4 billion in short-term financing.

Speaking at the White House, Bush said General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, both of which have said they are in danger of running out of cash soon, would have immediate access to the money.

"The American people want the auto companies to succeed, and so do I," the president said.

"If we were to allow the free market to take its course now, it would surely lead to bankruptcy and liquidation of the industry," he said.

"Allowing the auto companies to collapse is not a responsible course of action."

Some $13.4 billion — $9.4 billion for GM and $4 billion for Chrysler — would be available through January and would be drawn from the $700 billion fund that was originally earmarked to rescue the financial industry.

Source.

[edit on 3/21/10 by Ferris.Bueller.II]



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I have tried to build a coalition of people on both sides of every issue over the months I have been a member here. I have failed miserably. A couple see that I am not all about the conservative attitude.

I am flexible. I could see TRUE socialism reforms. Ones that WOULD NOT effect my freedoms. But the divide runs deep and I feel that the maneuvers presented by both sides of the paradigm are against us.

I am one that has agreed that Reagan himself was a Neo Con. He was one of the first to pillage the SS and Medicare systems. Of course I do not like either system.

We have to set aside our differences and see that neither party has our best interests at heart.

Peace and screw the NWO.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Why is it "unconstitutional" if President Obama does it, but not if former President Bush (number 43) does?

www.archives.gov...



As I recall, the whole government ran on Executive Order back then.

Doesn't make it right though.



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Alright, I am going to post this and I hope everyone reads it!

Fox News is currently running all kinds of interviews today. Watch it!

They are backing the Dems! They are backing this maneuver! Sorry people, if you have an open mind and see beyond the veil.

The Dem/Repub paradigm is repeated in the MSM by the MSNBC/Fox News!

SORRY PEOPLE, the Fox News channel is NOT following the conservative viewpoint. They are behind this move!

Prove me wrong!



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe

Peace and screw the NWO.


Amen to that!

If the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was abolished at least half our problems would be immediately solved. If congress does not have the intestinal fortitude to do it, the president could sign an EO and abolish it with a stroke of his pen.

Of course he might get killed over it but eventually someone has to do it before america becomes a 2nd or 3rd class nation. The whole idea of the NWO is to bring america down to europe's level so they can have full control. America is still a bit too strong in their eyes.....



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Yea, I been noticing that for quite a while,



posted on Mar, 21 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by endisnighe

.....

If the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was abolished at least half our problems would be immediately solved. .....


TESTIFY!!!!!

If there is an afterlife, I feel sorry for President Wilson (assuming he cared at all).

The depth of the travesty shows just how long ago we lost control of our government as they gave us into debt servitude.

[edit on 21-3-2010 by Maxmars]






top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join