Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    11,734
    vCash
    1500

    House approves lawsuit against President Obama.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...ecutive-power/


    The House on Wednesday approved a highly contentious lawsuit against President Obama over his alleged abuse of executive power, teeing up an election-year legal battle sure to spill onto the midterm campaign trail.

    The House backed the lawsuit resolution on a vote of 225-201, with all Democrats opposed.

    Republicans say the lawsuit is necessary to keep the president in constitutional check, after he allegedly exceeded his authority with unilateral changes to the Affordable Care Act.

    Democrats branded the effort a political charade aimed at stirring up GOP voters for this fall's congressional elections. They also said it's an effort by top Republicans to mollify conservatives who want Obama to be impeached -- something House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he has no plans to do.

    “We have no plans to impeach the president. We have no future plans. Listen, it's all a scam, started by Democrats at the White House,” Boehner said Tuesday.

    Following the vote, National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Greg Walden issued a statement saying, “President Obama swore an oath to uphold the Constitution—an oath he has not fully lived up to. Today, the House took an important step to defend the Constitution and hold the president accountable.”

    White House adviser Dan Pfeiffer sent an email saying, “The House of Representatives just took a vote -- and it wasn't to raise the minimum wage, put in place equal pay, create jobs, or reform our broken immigration system.

    Instead, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives just voted to sue the President for using his executive authority. This lawsuit will waste valuable time and potentially millions of taxpayer dollars.”

    Republicans said their planned legal action was warranted because, they argue, Obama has violated his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws. They say that instead, he has enforced laws as he wants to, dangerously shifting power to the presidency from Congress.

    "The people's representatives will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness of this president," said Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo. "We will do whatever it takes to hold him and future occupants of the Oval Office accountable."

    Democrats dismissed the proposed lawsuit as a legally groundless exercise that could end up costing taxpayers millions of dollars in legal fees and other expenses. But they've tried linking the suit to impeachment talk by conservatives like former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and turning it into a fundraising device.

    Democrats have sent pleas for contributions to their supporters warning that the GOP is out to impeach Obama and ruin his presidency. Using that pitch, Democrats raised $1 million Monday, according to the head of the House Democratic campaign organization, Rep. Steve Israel, D-N.Y.

    The lawsuit will focus on how Obama has carried out his health care overhaul.

    Republicans say Obama has illegally changed the law using executive actions. The White House and Democrats say he's acted legally and within the latitude he's empowered to use as chief executive.

    In particular, Republicans have objected that Obama has twice delayed the law's so-called employer mandate, which he did under pressure from business groups. The provision requires companies with 50 or more employees working at least 30 hours weekly to offer health care coverage or pay fines, while businesses with fewer than 50 workers are exempt.

    The requirement was initially to take effect this year. Now, companies with 50 to 99 employees have until 2016 to comply, while bigger companies have until next year.

    Republicans say there are other examples of Obama exceeding his powers. These include failing to notify Congress in advance when he traded five Taliban members held at the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the captive Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, and unilaterally preventing the deportation of some children who illegally immigrated to the U.S.

    They also point to Obama's comments in January that 2014 would be a "year of action" to implement his priorities, which he said he would do "with or without Congress" by using his "pen and the phone."

    "Such a shift in power should alarm members of both political parties because it threatens the very institution of the Congress," said a GOP-written report accompanying the legislation.
    Is this political masturbation, or do they have a legitimate case?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    36,755
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by BcEuAbRsS View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...ecutive-power/




    Is this political masturbation, or do they have a legitimate case?
    Let's put it this way:

    The GOP can't wait for a ruling to come.


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,070
    vCash
    1500
    The U.S. Constitution is an extremely vague document. Especially when it describes executive power. Throughout U.S. history the Presidency has been gaining more and more power. It used to be that the Congress was overwhelmingly in control of policy, but not so much today.

    President George W Bush was excoriated by critics for excessive use of Presidential power too. Probably because he had stretched the limits of executive power. Obama is now doing the same. Many Presidents have always pushed the boundaries of executive power.

    I don't know the specifics of this particular lawsuit. A few things are for certain though.

    1. If history has proven anything Presidents testing their might is to be expected.
    2. The Presidency has been gaining power from the start.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,422
    vCash
    1500
    Political masturbation is a great way to describe this. The GOP is trying to please their base without having to put in much effort. But the Democrats love it too, don't let them fool you. Both sides are going to fundraiser like crazy on this.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Allentown, PA
    Posts
    7,132
    vCash
    1500
    Can I sue Boehner for wasting time and taxpayers' money? I feel like at some point this is more harmful to the country than anything else. Stop wasting time with these bull**** political maneuverings and try to actually help improve the country.

    Did the GOP want Obama not to give businesses a longer time for the ACA? I doubt it. They just want an excuse to waste even more time and to further make things difficult for this presidency.

    I'm sure that this will make conservatives happy, but I can't imagine that this is going to win over a lot of centrists or independents.
    2014 Adopt-a-Packer: Micah Hyde

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Land Beyond the Wall, VT
    Posts
    7,130
    vCash
    1500
    Dear Mr. Speaker,

    Either impeach the guy, or have a nice, warm, tall mug of STFU.

    Your Biggest and Bestest Buddy and Big Toe,

    PF56

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,422
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Patsfan56 View Post
    Dear Mr. Speaker,

    Either impeach the guy, or have a nice, warm, tall mug of STFU.

    Your Biggest and Bestest Buddy and Big Toe,

    PF56
    He isn't stupid enough to do that. He doesn't want to give the Democrats the midterms. This is a middle ground that can keep his base shutup long enough to make it through the midterms and the federal government will be paying for it as opposed to the GOP.
    Member of the Owlluminati!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,915
    vCash
    1500
    Executive overreach is a valid constitutional concern, not "masturbation." But like another poster said, it's been a concern for the last 5 or 6 presidencies. It has gotten markedly worse over the last two, however.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,070
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by flea View Post
    Executive overreach is a valid constitutional concern, not "masturbation." But like another poster said, it's been a concern for the last 5 or 6 presidencies. It has gotten markedly worse over the last two, however.
    It's a valid concern. It's only natural that congress is drawing the line in the sand.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,198
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by flea View Post
    Executive overreach is a valid constitutional concern, not "masturbation." But like another poster said, it's been a concern for the last 5 or 6 presidencies. It has gotten markedly worse over the last two, however.
    Exactly. And we know how seriously Republicans take both executive over-reach, what with their enormous outcry during the Bush years, and exactly how seriously they take impeachment from the BJ years.

    Both sides are using this as a fundraising ploy to stir up their bases for the mid-term elections. The difference is that the Republican base may actually demand it happen as a result of the fury they've been whipped into.
    “A riot,” said Martin Luther King, “is the language of the unheard.”

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    indianpolis - north side
    Posts
    9,444
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BcEuAbRsS View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...ecutive-power/


    Is this political masturbation, or do they have a legitimate case?
    JMO, but this seems an attempt to avoid doing something really stupid, impeachment without making the right wing of their base angry. I am a little surprised though. Since the primaries are over, there is plenty of time for angry tea party types to get over it. It's not like they are going to vote for someone else in the general.

    So basically this is a case of bad political theater.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NOR CAL
    Posts
    8,794
    vCash
    1500
    Just makes me feel like the money (front and behind the scenes) and the beni's are all well worth the fine job we get from our elected officials and government types.

    the machine is out of control
    Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.-Theodore Roosevelt


    There's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.
    -Barack "drone" Obama, 11/18/2012

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,422
    vCash
    1500
    Just out of curiosity, what happens if the House wins this case? Is impeachment the rectification? I mean the House has to prove damages and a reasonable remedy has to be available. Correct? So what are the damages and what is the remedy the court can provide?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NOR CAL
    Posts
    8,794
    vCash
    1500
    Well they could write a really stern letter and put it in his file I am sure.
    Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.-Theodore Roosevelt


    There's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.
    -Barack "drone" Obama, 11/18/2012

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,198
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Just out of curiosity, what happens if the House wins this case? Is impeachment the rectification? I mean the House has to prove damages and a reasonable remedy has to be available. Correct? So what are the damages and what is the remedy the court can provide?
    They will ask for injunctive relief, which means a court order to stop the executive order the President issued. It is hard to imagine any damages being pursued. It's not clear to me how Rep. Boehner has standing to sue, but I am sure that is an issue they've considered.'

    This is a sop to those who want to impeach the President for frankly idiotic reasons. If there is to be a suit or an impeachment, I can happily provide a heckuva lot better reasons than this, starting with due-process-free executions of American citizens.

    When the President baits the Republicans into trying to impeach him for issuing work permits to all the undocumented workers in the US? Then we'll have a real story. It may happen sooner rather than later, and there is absolutely no way that Boehner keeps his troops in line at that point. I predict a Republican Congressman will accuse the President of treason over it. Place odds?

    Finally, the shift in power from the legislative branch to the executive is a real problem. However, that problem has been generated, in part, by cowards in the legislative branch. They have feared being held accountable for consequential votes for decades -- see no Congress having the balls to declare war, a power expressly given the legislature, since Pearl Harbor, despite their tacitly enabling us to wage war about 20 times since then.
    “A riot,” said Martin Luther King, “is the language of the unheard.”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •