Posted on 03/21/2010 2:05:40 PM PDT by Steelfish
Executive Order Hijinks [Andy McCarthy]
I know we tire of the hypocrisy, but I really think this is remarkable. We spent the eight years through January 19, 2009, listening to Democrats complain that President Bush had purportedly caused a constitutional crisis by issuing signing statements when he signed bills into law.
Democrats and Arlen Specter (now a Democrat) complained that these unenforceable, non-binding expressions of the executive's interpretation of the laws Bush was signing were a usurpation Congress's power to enact legislation.
But now Democrats are going to abide not a mere signing statement but an executive order that purports to have the effect of legislation — in fact, has the effect of nullifying legislation that Congress is simultaneously enacting?
The Susan B. Anthony List observation that EOs can be rescinded at the president's whim is of course true. This particuar EO is also a nullity — presidents cannot enact laws, the Supreme Court has said they cannot impound funds that Congress allocates, and (as a friend points out) the line-item veto has been held unconstitutional, so they can't use executive orders to strike provisions in a bill.
So this anti-abortion EO is blatant chicanery: if the pro-lifers purport to be satisfied by it, they are participating in a transparent fraud and selling out the pro-life cause.
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
What makes you so sure ..??
Did you click on the link to the video? In that video, Stupak says he can vote ‘yes’ even if he does not get what he claims to want. He says he made his point, and if he loses, he can still vote ‘yes’ “because that’s the way a democracy works”.
So what was this stand-off all about then ..??
Just face time on the TV ..??
What a schmuck!
Still there may be a silver lining here, and it does not involve Stupak. By passing the bill, it will become apparent what is in it and opposition will grow, hopefully leading to a repeal. If it had failed, republicans would be blamed for stopping reform.
Indeed, Stupak will go down with history’s biggest suckers.
Boehner: “Pro-Life” Democrats Can’t Hide Behind an Executive Order
Rec’d via e-mail | Sunday, March 21, 2010 | John Boehner
GOP Leader: “Make no mistake, a ‘yes’ vote on the Democrats’ health care bill is a vote for taxpayer-funded abortions.”... See More
WASHINGTON, DC – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement on a potential Executive Order from the White House on abortion:
“The law of the land trumps any Executive Order, which can be reversed or altered at the stroke of a pen by this or any subsequent President without any congressional approval or notice. Moreover, while an Executive Order can direct members of the executive branch, it cannot direct the private sector.
“Because of Roe v. Wade, courts have interpreted the decision as a statutory mandate that the government must provide federal funding for elective abortion in through federal programs. In other words, no Executive Order or regulation can override a statutory mandate unless Congress passes a law that prohibits federal funding from being used in this manner. Legal experts at the US Catholic Conference of Bishops, National Right to Life Committee, Americans United for Life, and Family Research Council have confirmed this view that if the Senate bill is signed into law, it is a statutory mandate for the new health plans to include federal funding of elective abortion. The need for an Executive Order is evidence that this is true, and Congressional Democrats know it. Make no mistake, a ‘yes’ vote on the Democrats’ health care bill is a vote for taxpayer-funded abortions.”
Hmmmm ..?? Thanks for just repeating your message which I already read.
Obviously, you didn’t read mine.
According to what is posted it is not valid. The other I can’t answer the questions or statements, as I didn’t hear the news, hubby has sports on. I’m getting my news from FR.
Well .. somewhere here on FR is an article saying that within the Senate bill is a provision that PROHIBITS REPEAL of certain provisions of the bill.
These dems are just plain evil. All they want is TOTAL CONTROL OF ALL OF AMERICA .. and I’m really afraid they have pushed us too far.
The Constitution says we can dissolve the current govt and start over .. and I’m really concerned that we may really have to do that in order to get our Freedom back from these socialist tyrants.
With Obamacare, I’ll probably never live to see it.
Stop deluding yourself because it will never be repealed—big entitlements have always had this huge fight before they are passed, but in the end after they pass they stay forever. Why is that? Because the freeloaders love the taste of their cheese and the politicians talk tough but will never show enough balls to take it away.
Fixed it and sadly it appears this will likely need to be the case.
Sorry .. I’m exhausted .. and ill.
I get so tired of this image being over used, but in this case, it is entirely appropriate and well placed. Good show.
From my automatic email:
“STATEMENT BY THE NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE COMMITTEE
ON ABORTION “DEAL” ON HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION
WASHINGTON — (Sunday, March 21, 2010, 6 PM EDT) — In response to today’s announcement regarding an agreement between Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mi.) and President Obama on the pending health care bill (H.R. 3590), the following statement was issued by the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of right-to-life organizations in the 50 states:
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) remains strongly opposed to the Senate-passed health bill (H.R. 3590). A lawmaker who votes for this bill is voting to require federal agencies to subsidize and administer health plans that will pay for elective abortion, and voting to undermine longstanding pro-life policies in other ways as well. Pro-life citizens nationwide know that this is a pro-abortion bill. Pro-life citizens know, and they will be reminded again and again, which lawmakers deserve their gratitude for voting against this pro-abortion legislation.
The executive order promised by President Obama was issued for political effect. It changes nothing. It does not correct any of the serious pro-abortion provisions in the bill. The president cannot amend a bill by issuing an order, and the federal courts will enforce what the law says.
To elaborate: The order does not truly correct any of the seven objectionable pro-abortion provisions described in NRLC’s March 19 letter to the House of Representatives, which is posted here: www.nrlc.org/AHC/NRLCToHouseOnHealthBill.pdf
.
Regarding Community Health Centers (CHCs), NRLC has documented the problem created by H.R. 3590 here: www.nrlc.org/AHC/NRLCMemoCommHealth.html.
Prof. Robert Destro, a professor of law and former dean of the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America, and an expert on abortion-related litigation, has sent lawmakers a letter explaining why the bill opens the door to direct federal funding of abortion in Community Health Centers: www.nrlc.org/ahc/DestroLetterToStupakOnCommHealthCenters.pdf
.
Prof. Destro clearly explains why it is the statutory language that will govern.
Regarding the new program to provide tax credits to purchase private insurance, the executive order merely tinkers with the formalities of a bookkeeping scheme under which federal subsidies will pay for plans that cover elective abortion — a break from the longstanding principles of the Hyde Amendment.
The order does nothing at all to mitigate the other abortion-related problems described in the NRLC letter, dealing with bill provisions that create dangerous regulatory mandate authorities, revise Indian health programs, and create pools of directly appropriated funds that are not covered by existing restrictions on funding of abortion. Nor can the order correct the omission from the pending legislation of the necessary conscience-protection language that had been included in House-passed health care legislation last November (the “Weldon language”).
For additional information regarding the abortion-related components of the legislation, and NRLC’s assessment of the gravity of these issues, please refer to the March 19 letter linked above, and other materials posted on the NRLC website at www.nrlc.org/AHC/Index.html.”
Perfectly understandable considering what's happening today. Get well soon.
It’s even worse than that. Suppose the legal challenges are appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Then you have a conservative Supreme Court stuck in an untenable position—either they uphold the law and strike down the EO as un-Constitutional, thus ensuring that Federal money for abortions flows freely (and being seen as Judases by the anti-abortion wing of the GOP)...or they uphold the EO, fly in the face of the Constitution, please the anti-abortion advocates, and infuriate strict constructionists. Either way, the Republicans turn on themselves.
Diabolically brilliant move by Obama and his cronies.
}:-)4
OK, you’re right, I guess. No need to vote, or contribute to other candidates. Might as well shoot myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.