Posted on 04/01/2015 9:21:02 AM PDT by rktman
President Obama is about to commit the United States to meet greenhouse gas emission targets in an international agreement without consulting Congress, the agencies, or the states.
Republicans are warning other countries that the president's executive orders can be overturned and that any negotiations should take that into account.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Both Obama and the UN are chuckling because they have yet to see anyone with guts enough to override anything Obama does.
What the people have not agreed to (through their representatives in the legislature) need not be obeyed in the least.
Ignore any new regulations until January 2017 and let the regulatory agencies catch up. They work like molasses anyway.
The GOP options are truly limited. Can’t get veto proof laws passed to stop him (but getting close on demanding a look at the inevitable Iran deal) and get killed by shutting down gov’t.
This is a great strategy. Tell everyone who deals with his Executive Orders that it could all go away on Jan 21st, 2017. Talk about frustrating Obama. Its the only viable weapon, and it is Constitutionally sound.
Every time he threatens an Exec Order, just let it be known that, unless Congress approves, it is just temporary.
(Oh, and we have to win the White House in 2016 to make it stick - little wrinkle there!)
They could cut EPA funding 30% in the next budget, right now. But there would be political problems...I do like that they are undermining everything that the bed wetter does through other means.
“GOP warns U.N. Obama’s climate actions can be undone”
Great.
Now who is going to undo them?
(Crickets)
If there is money in it, Establishment Republicans never see evil.
Period!
In 2016 R candidates, I want a clear plan from the person who gets my vote on how the illegalities of the last 6+ years will be overturned and when - and then, what safeguards will be put in place so that they won’t happen in the future (I’m going to assume that the next R President will also have a R Congress, albeit probably not veto-proof). I can think of at least TWO potential candidates who won’t be able to provide that.
More specifically, both Thomas Jefferson and the Supreme Court have clarified that the Senate cannot use its constitutional power to negotiate treaties as a back to forcing the states to comply with laws which are based on powers which the states have never delegated to the feds expressly via the Constitution.
“In giving to the President and Senate a power to make treaties, the Constitution meant only to authorize them to carry into effect, by way of treaty, any powers they might constitutionally exercise.” —Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.
“Surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.” — Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1812 .
Note that Jefferson undoubtedly based his insight to limits of treaty power on his experience as vice president and president of the Senate.
A more important example concerning limits on treaty powers powers comes from the Supreme Court. In fact, the Court reflected on Jefferson’s words, clarifying that Congress cannot use it’s power to negotiate treaties as a backdoor way to expand its constitutionally-limited powers.
"2. Insofar as Art. 2(11) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice provides for the military trial of civilian dependents accompanying the armed forces in foreign countries, it cannot be sustained as legislation which is "necessary and proper" to carry out obligations of the United States under international agreements made with those countries, since no agreement with a foreign nation can confer on Congress or any other branch of the Government power which is free from the restraints of the Constitution [emphasis added].” — Reid v. Covert, 1956.
The problem with the popularly elected Senate is this imo. After low-information citizens vote for their federal senators they go home and watch football, oblivious to the idea that the Senate is doing all kinds of things that it has no constituitonal authority to do.
"In every event, I would rather construe so narrowly as to oblige the nation to amend, and thus declare what powers they would agree to yield, than too broadly, and indeed, so broadly as to enable the executive and the Senate [emphasis added] to do things which the Constitution forbids." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.
And even after three election cycles, voters have been slow to wise up to lawless Obama’s criminal arrogance. As a consequence, voters haven’t elected the 2/3 senate conservative majority to guarantee an override a veto of a bill which could kill Obama’s unconstitutional executive action excuse to deal with the UN.
What a mess! :^(
The 17th Amendment needs to disappear imo.
He's not using executive orders to regulate CO2 and make international agreements. He is using SCOTUS decisions, so you need to look at that.
In Massachusetts vs EPA(2007), SCOTUS ruled that CO2 was a pollutant and told EPA to regulate CO2 with the clean air act(1972). Based on that language, EPA/Obama needs nothing from Congress. This decision was a narrow 5 to 4, which makes it controversial.
The second SCOTUS decisions was 2011 in AEP vs Connecticut in which SCOTUS said only the federal govt via the EPA has the authority to regulate CO2. By using that language, SCOTUS was re-enforcing their 2007 decision.
The last decision was 2014 in Utility Air Regulatory Group vs EPA and SCOTUS upheld Obama's CO2 regulations on new permits.
Now, the fight is over Obama's CO2 regulations on existing permits, which he issued in June 2014. This will probably have to go to SCOTUS also, but given their past decisions, SCOTUS is likely to uphold Obama.
But if the GOP congress wants to stop this, it is very easy. They can enact a carbon regulation scheme themselves such as a cap and trade or cap and tax program. But they need 6 dem votes to get the 60 cloture votes in the senate. Plus, if Obama doesn't like it, he can veto.
The fact that McConnell is making certain statements implies that he and the GOP don't have away to stop Obama.
Prior to this statement in which he is trying to warn other nations not to co-operate with Obama, a few weeks ago, he made a statement in which he was urging the individual states not to submit their CO2 plans back to the EPA, which they all ignored, including Kentucky.
I thought that when the EPA was set up during the Nixon Admin, oversight of the EPA was Congress. When did this change?
Can't be done, at least not constitutionally, that is how far gone we are.
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.