Thursday, September 18, 2014

President 'Twiddling His Thumbs' or Unilaterally Making Laws

Update, - September 23rd, 2014 - More Obama lawbreaking.
"Obama hits at companies moving overseas to avoid taxes" - WaPo, By Lori Montgomery September 22, 2014
Ms. Montgomery writes,
"The Obama administration took action Monday to discourage corporations from moving their headquarters abroad to avoid U.S. taxes, announcing new rules designed to make such transactions significantly less profitable.
The rules, which take effect immediately, will not block the practice, and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew again called on Congress to enact more far-reaching reforms. But in the meantime, he said, federal officials “cannot wait to address this problem,” which threatens to rob the U.S. Treasury of tens of billions of dollars." Continue reading...

The Obama administration has changed tax law without the benefit of the US Congress, your representatives. The Washington Post reports that in an effort to stop US companies from trying to escape their tax policies, they have unilaterally changed the law to penalize companies that relocate overseas.

The President of the United States, a documented constitutional scholar, believes he has the lawful power to make law without the benefit of congressional input, claiming...
“The American people don’t want me standing around twiddling my thumbs waiting for Congress to do something,” - MSNBC
This comes after a January Cabinet meeting where he says..
"We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help they need. I've got a pen and I've got a phone, and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward in helping to make sure our kids are getting the best education possible, making sure that our businesses are getting the kind of support and help they need to grow and advance, to make sure that people are getting the skills that they need to get those jobs that our businesses are creating."  -

What disturbs me about it is not just that he believes he can do this.  My problem is how the US Congress, the media and some people, seem to believe it is lawful and that everyone in or out of the Obama administration would be required to follow any of his extra-constitutional executive orders."

The issue is not how many, the issue is legality.

Many Obama supporters, such as the Brookings Institute, will talk about the number of executive orders with emphasis on other presidents having issued many more than President Obama, while overlooking the legalities of any of them. is another Democratic Party support machine that routinely prints fringe statements and then grades them.  As with any good lie, there are elements of truth involved. In this one, they received a request to fact check an email from a third party.
"I am submitting the email below for analysis by your great organization."
The truth is the "email" was portions of a Western Journalism post from June 2012. Again the issue there was how many (which the author apparently overstated).  But still, the point was the number of signing statements -  oh, and Martial law rules (something all president sign) - which is an interesting but off point side note.

So are there any illegal executive orders and signing statements from President Obama?

Let's start with the Affordable Care Act.  The president has changed the law, without the benefit of a congressional vote, many times - each time the change was in response to failures of the law or complaints from affected parties, such as congressional staff employees, business owners, insurance companies and the states.  Among the 42 ObamaCare changes (as of  July 2014)  twenty-four were by "administrative action" ( iow's -EO & SS).  The US Constitution does not bestow the Executive Branch with the power to change laws that have been voted on by our representatives in congress.

Then there is the Bowe Bergdahl prisoner exchange.  The president signed an executive order authorizing trading 5 Gitmo prisoners for the deserter, Bowe Bergdahl, and then made the trade without consulting the US Congress. That was in violation of the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act (Section 1035(d), which was signed into law by the president. This law requires notifications 30 days prior to releasing Gitmo prisoners.

Does anyone have to follow these illegal orders?  

Uh, no. It's illegal;.  What part of illegal needs explaining?

Neither the president nor any of his supporters can show how changing laws without passing it through the US Congress is in any way legal or binding. The president has no legal authority to issue laws that have not been passed by the US Congress. As such - in my estimation - no one and no federal agency would be required to follow or enforce such unlawful edicts.

If any federal agency attempts to enforce an unlawful order, that institution and the offending employees should be prosecuted for violating the law.


Dear Mr. President.  I agree the people do not want you standing around twiddling your thumbs, but they - we - do not want you disregarding the laws of the land either.

These laws are on the books to help protect the American people from the injustices that can occur in government: Not to help make the president's job easier.   We all realize the negotiating with congress is hard, but that is the only way to lawfully change or make laws for the federal government.  If you find that you are unable to deal with the requirements of the job, then I respectfully suggest that you find employment elsewhere and leave the job to those who would honor their oath of office.

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."   - Library of Congress

No comments:

Post a Comment

Keep it clean. Comments are not censored, but will be removed upon discovery of foul or unlawful language (such as threatening politicians with bodily harm).