I support national health care, but what the president is doing is effectively amending or negating the federal law to fit his preferred approach. Democrats will rue the day if they remain silent in the face of this shift of power to the executive branch.
—Jonathan Turley, law professor at George Washington University
The above quote is from yesterday’s New York Times article, Obama Extends Renewal Period for Noncompliant Insurance Policies. That to me is the worst part about the Affordable Care Act debacle. Obama is setting the precedent that presidents can delay or suspend any law they choose — not just those regarding health care. It’s a huge constitutional issue, and presumably sooner or later someone will challenge that shift of power. It should be interesting.
March 6, 2014
This sort of “interesting” is something the country should not have to be facing. Unfortunately, Obama has been — and is currently — taking similar liberties with the law in other areas. One has to wonder what has been missed by the public and the less than vigilant media during this administration.
This article was from the New York TImes, not the Wall Street Journal. So it’s good that at least one of the liberal papers is starting to be concerned. My guess is we’ll gradually start hearing more. I’ve been on the lookout and will continue to be.
We are having a similar issuing of ordinances going on because the now adjourned parliament did not pass some legislation. We however have safeguards which ensure that there is no misuse. This link will give you an idea about the latest approach by our executive to circumvent the legislature. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Govts-bid-to-convince-President-on-ordinances-fails/articleshow/31426744.cms
Correct me if I’m wrong, but your problem seems to be a president who interferes with proposed laws. This article is about Obama not following laws that have been passed.
I thought the President always had that power.
The President is head of the executive branch. Congress is supposed to legislate/make the laws, he’s in charge of executing/enforcing them. We’re supposed to have a balance of power between the executive, legislative and judicial branches.
Obama has been changing parts of some of the laws. Or in the case of marijuana, he’s saying he won’t enforce the laws. I’m not saying he’s wrong in what he wants, just that it’s a dangerous precedent to give the president so much power.
I agree, but would clarify one thing. Nobody is giving him so much power. He is assuming the power on his own. So to rephrase slightly, “it’s a dangerous precedent…” for “the president” to assume so much power.
Mike,
Yes, he’s assuming the power, and if he’s not stopped then that power will become a precedent for future presidents.
The Parliament did not pass the acts and the ruling dispensation wanted to issue ordinances instead to be ratified by the next parliament. Our President, is not an executive president. He is the constitutional head somewhat like the Queen of England. one of the checks and balances, thankfully refused to oblige.