Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, I agree. Someone needs to finally answer that question directly. How was it legal for President Obama to pass money directly to insurance companies to offset premiums for lower middle class recipients for their premiums.
OK. Here's your direct answer.
The president.........any president, can sign any executive order he chooses to. He has that power to do so, just like a president can grant a pardon or amnesty to anybody he chooses to.
The order is deemed legal by virtue that the president signed it and the constitution gives him the authority to do so.
Until such a time as a Federal judge rules the order illegal, the order is legal by virtue of the constitutional powers granted to the president. Any president.
FYI: no court ruled on President Obama's executive order concerning the insurance subsidies. I admit that if a court had ruled, there was at least a 50-50 chance that the EO would have been found unconstitutional. But until or unless a court rules on the EO, the president's EO is legal by definition.
Every thread by the Trumpsters on the subject starts with the premise that the order was illegal on it's face but this is just their partisan opinion erroneously stated as facts of the discussion. The Obama executive order concerning subsidies has never been challenged in court and ruled on by any federal judge, therefor, the president's EO is legal according to the powers granted to him by the constitution.
Let's see you dance around that answer with a 2 step cha cha.
And, irregardless if whether or not it is settled in the courts...
Do you Mohawkx think it was constitutional to bypass congress approval for spending?
Also, what's wrong with undoing a very questionable EO with another EO that does not do anything extra except undoing the prior?
The judge ruled that Congress had legal standing to sue and that there was probable cause for the legal challenge to move through the courts.
She did not rule on the constitutional legality of the EO.
But I'll admit, a very convincing argument was presented against the legality of the EO.
Unless there is a final ruling on the constitutionality of the EO by a federal court, it is a legal EO as defined by the powers granted to the president by the constitution.
And, irregardless if whether or not it is settled in the courts...
Do you Mohawkx think it was constitutional to bypass congress approval for spending?
Also, what's wrong with undoing a very questionable EO with another EO that does not do anything extra except undoing the prior?
Yes, I think it was a good move to sign that particular EO by Obama. If not, the entire health care system would have collapsed. As far as the legal ramifications, I'm not a judge, I can't make that call.
Nothing is wrong with undoing one EO with another EO. As I've stated, the president......any president, has the constitutional power to sign any EO he or she chooses to sign. It is up to the judicial system and the legislature to rescind the EO or find it unconstitutional.
The problem with trumps move is he is not providing any Solution. It is easy to say a building is on the verge of collapse it is another thi8ng to knock it down without any real replacement for it. The promise was Repeal AND Replace, what was suggested as a Replacement is not acceptable to even Party members. Demolition without rebuilding is not true leadership and not good for the Nation.
Kind of irrelevant really.
Most people who were negatively affected by Obamacare..... and there's a lot of us..... would be happy with a simple repeal at this point.
Personally, I don't particularly care if they "replace" it with anything if they cannot show that it is demonstrably better than a simple repeal.
The whole reason we're in this mess to begin with is the Democrat's insistence on "doing something even if it's wrong" .
Was healthcare perfect before the ACA?
Of course not.
But for millions of Americans including myself, it was a Hell of a lot better than it is now.
Most people who were negatively affected by Obamacare..... and there's a lot of us..... would be happy with a simple repeal at this point.
Personally, I don't particularly care if they "replace" it with anything if they cannot show that it is demonstrably better than a simple repeal.
The whole reason we're in this mess to begin with is the Democrat's insistence on "doing something even if it's wrong" .
Was healthcare perfect before the ACA?
Of course not.
But for millions of Americans including myself, it was a Hell of a lot better than it is now.
And for millions it is better now than it was before Obamacare.
The cause of this is not solely them Dems fault. The GOP has had ample chance to put forth something to deal with the issue, and they consistently did nothing, and fought anything the Dems attempted. Nixon (GOP, remember?) first proposed the idea, and then in the aftermath of Watergate 12 years of Reagan and Bush produced nothing, the Clinton attempts were derailed, 8 years of compassionate conservatism from GWB produced nothing, the GOP sat on their hands and refused to participate through the beginnings of the Obama attempts, and in the end a crappy bill was finally pushed through that helped many medically and hurt many others financially.
And for millions it is better now than it was before Obamacare.
The cause of this is not solely them Dems fault. The GOP has had ample chance to put forth something to deal with the issue, and they consistently did nothing, and fought anything the Dems attempted. Nixon (GOP, remember?) first proposed the idea, and then in the aftermath of Watergate 12 years of Reagan and Bush produced nothing, the Clinton attempts were derailed, 8 years of compassionate conservatism from GWB produced nothing, the GOP sat on their hands and refused to participate through the beginnings of the Obama attempts, and in the end a crappy bill was finally pushed through that helped many medically and hurt many others financially.
Blame enough to go around. At least Obama tried.
Oh I'm sure Obamacare helped some people.
But it undoubtedly screwed a lot more.
You don't "help" 21 million by screwing over 300 million.
At least at this point, a lot of Democrats are agreeing that O'care is a failure (probably because their premiums and deductibles went sky high like mine did.)
For a long time Dems defended the ACA at all costs (many still do, namely the ones who still have good insurance).
What we had before the ACA wasn't perfect, but Dems suffer under the illusion that if they just "care" enough, they can make things perfect and fair for all.
And that longing for Utopian bliss will be our undoing.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Minded
Liberals, (or left leaning folks) explain to me how it was constitutional for President Obama to bypass congress and appropriate money to the insurance companies by executive order to prop up the ACA?
All President Trump is doing is canceling that executive order with his own executive order.
If President Obama had gotten the money the correct way, then President Trump could not undo it so easily as it would have been appropriated fair and square. He would have to go through congress as well.
But alas, he did not... so what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
IF Obama's XO was so obviously unconstitutional as alleged, explain why Trump, who promised to repeal the ACA and replace it with something far better immediately upon taking office, waited 9 months to get off his fat butt and do something?
The problem with trumps move is he is not providing any Solution. It is easy to say a building is on the verge of collapse it is another thi8ng to knock it down without any real replacement for it. The promise was Repeal AND Replace, what was suggested as a Replacement is not acceptable to even Party members. Demolition without rebuilding is not true leadership and not good for the Nation.
In the first place - there was NO Executive Order from President Trump to stop the Insurance Bailout payments - I don't know that there was an Executive Memo from Obama to start the Insurance Bailout payments.
What we do know is that the Democrats forgot to fund that section of the ACA Law and President Obama attempted to get it funded later - twice (which is an admission that he knew it wasn't funded).
President Trump clearly "offered a solution" - the same solution that President Obama asked for and the same solution that both the Federal Court and US Attorney General Sessions recommended.
The Constitution is clear - Congress has the "power of the purse". There is no funding for this until they pass a Bill that does fund it. Every single CongressCritter is aware of that, every single Citizen should be aware of that.
It's pretty much Government 101, and Constitution 101.
An illegal executive order was undone by a legal executive order.
There.
exactly right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
