[2ndDivisionVet]

So, in effect, we already live in a fascist state?

[perfect_rovian_storm]

Yeah, but in order to get what he really wants, which is the inability to UNdo it, he needs legislation passed. All it will do otherwise is destroy the economy even more throughout his term, without forcing the next guy (or gal) to do it the same way.

[RC2]

Yep, the Czars in Washington over ride Congress. The sad part is that Congress hasn’t seen it yet.

[Busywhiskers]

I read somewhere else that regulations can be overturned based on “science” and laws cannot. So this may be a blessing considering the recent problems with global warming data.

[hoosier hick]

I posted this a couple of days ago:

Yep, at most all Congress does anymore is create vague “frameworks” and turn responsibility over to the executive branch to “interpret and implement.” In my opinion, legislation should be concise, clear and understandable to all— otherwise it’s just garbage.

It should be no surprise that Congress abdicates their responsibilities-- it happens every day. However, they COULD regain their power by passing (and overriding the inevitable veto) a law revising the original. Not that it will ever happen....

hh

[Iron Munro]

[BluesDuke]

Will liberals who decried George W. Bush's unilateralism object to this staggering concentration of executive power?

Hey, ask us a tough one. ;)

But it ought to be very interesting, indeed, to hear from those conservatives who excused Mr. Bush's unilateralism yet cry "executive tyranny" when His Excellency Al Hashish Field Marshmallow Dr. Barack Obama Dada, COD, RIP, LSMFT, Would-Be Life President of the Republic Formerly Known as the United States, and Would-Be Chairman of the Organisation of Halfrican Unity, exercises the very constitutional abomination such conservatives upheld on behalf of policies they favoured.

[BenLurkin]

there's little reason to think that "presidential supervision of administration inherently cuts in a deregulatory direction."

On the contrary -- there is every reason to think just that.

Liberty is the fundamental premise of American society. Every presentiment is against growing government and in favor of reducing government.

[apillar]

The problem is congress delegating THIER authority to these unelected bureaucrats in the EPA. They give them these broad mandates to “Reduce Pollution” and leave it to the bureaucrats to define what pollution is, how much to reduce it, and what methods to use. And since the goal of every bureaucrat is increase the power and funding of their organization they are going to define pollution as broadly as they can, and use the most heavy handed, labor intensive means of enforcing it.

[Jacquerie]

Yes.

“All Legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” Article 1 Section 1.

Not so fast. Scotus has no problem with judicial, legislative and executive functions in one unelected bureaucracy. The EPA can issue regs with the force of law, decide who broke their laws and punish the evildoers. As such it is a self contained government within our government with one exception, you cannot toss any of the EPA bums out of office.

Our government has washed way over its Constitutional banks. It is pitchfork time.

[Nathan Zachary]

"In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that the 1970 Clean Air Act's definition of air pollutant was broad enough to allow regulation of CO2 emissions from new cars, and that the EPA was required to regulate once it issued a finding that CO2 contributes to global warming."

But sinse that "finding" has been proven bogus, the EPA has no autority to regulate CO2 which is NOT a pollutant, and does not cause "global warming" and is detrimental to all life on this planet, in ways not even understood. Therefore, the EPA must be PREVENTED from tampering with CO2, as it may cause a global catastrophe by doing so.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !