U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Unemployment
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Unread 06-18-2010, 06:11 PM
 
613 posts, read 540,260 times
Reputation: 259
Default Extending benefits by executive order

Quote:
Originally Posted by WannaliveinGreenville View Post
I DID see that ! Obama wants them to help us ! But how much can he do to push this emergency 30 day extension until they work out something longer ?

PS, how do you guys get color text as above ? ( not to change the topic )
Obama can sign an executive order today, right now and extend the benefits to where he wants.. But he won't cause he don't want to overstep Reid and Pelosi.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Unread 06-18-2010, 08:09 PM
 
162 posts, read 179,045 times
Reputation: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by TruckDriver33 View Post
Obama can sign an executive order today, right now and extend the benefits to where he wants.. But he won't cause he don't want to overstep Reid and Pelosi.

the problem is, Obama can't issue an executive order to create a new Tier for unemployment. This is what people wanted him to do with the whole ARRA reauth anf Tier 3 and 4. It was explained somewhere why he can't issue an executive order on this issue. I believe it had to do with congressional approved spending parameters
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-18-2010, 08:28 PM
 
600 posts, read 645,073 times
Reputation: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rlukas79 View Post
the problem is, Obama can't issue an executive order to create a new Tier for unemployment. This is what people wanted him to do with the whole ARRA reauth anf Tier 3 and 4. It was explained somewhere why he can't issue an executive order on this issue. I believe it had to do with congressional approved spending parameters
I think what he's saying though is, why doesn't Obama do something to at least extend the current cut off dates, so those of us who haven't burned through 99 weeks will at least have some extra months to use up if we need it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-19-2010, 10:45 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
3,814 posts, read 7,401,723 times
Reputation: 902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rlukas79 View Post
the problem is, Obama can't issue an executive order to create a new Tier for unemployment. This is what people wanted him to do with the whole ARRA reauth anf Tier 3 and 4. It was explained somewhere why he can't issue an executive order on this issue. I believe it had to do with congressional approved spending parameters
Do you have a source for this? I haven't seen the use of executive order explained in relationship to federal unemployment benefits or congressional spending parameters, just in terms of political considerations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-19-2010, 11:09 AM
 
613 posts, read 540,260 times
Reputation: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by diorgirl View Post
Do you have a source for this? I haven't seen the use of executive order explained in relationship to federal unemployment benefits or congressional spending parameters, just in terms of political considerations.
Heres paragraph from sourcewatch.org:

Executive Order 12919: "National Emergency"

Should President George W. Bush proclaim and put into effect Executive Order 12919, "the President would put the United States under total Martial Law and Military Dictatorship." [2]
"The President need not wait for some emergency to occur, however. He can declare a National Emergency at any time, and freeze everything. Congress, and the States, are powerless to prevent such an Executive Dictatorship, as long as the President advises Congress in a timely matter." [3]


I think the Pres. can declare an unemployment emergency a national emergency and do an executive order.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-19-2010, 11:33 AM
C.C
 
2,235 posts, read 1,047,797 times
Reputation: 460
Quote:
Originally Posted by diorgirl View Post
Do you have a source for this? I haven't seen the use of executive order explained in relationship to federal unemployment benefits or congressional spending parameters, just in terms of political considerations.
How about this from Article I Section 9:

7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law;

Although a cynic might note that none of the money being spent is in the Treasury, my take is that the president is limited to spending funds that have been appropriated through enactment of a law. I would think that he could spend some of the previously appropriated ARRA funds on unemployment; maybe even repaid TARP funds although that would be a fairly clear violation of the TARP act. Actually I don't even see why an executive order would be needed for ARRA money since the law already gave him authority to spend it for recovery purposes...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-19-2010, 12:08 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
3,814 posts, read 7,401,723 times
Reputation: 902
Default Executive Orders and Federal Unemployment Legislation

Quote:
Originally Posted by C.C View Post
How about this from Article I Section 9:

7: No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law;

Although a cynic might note that none of the money being spent is in the Treasury, my take is that the president is limited to spending funds that have been appropriated through enactment of a law. I would think that he could spend some of the previously appropriated ARRA funds on unemployment; maybe even repaid TARP funds although that would be a fairly clear violation of the TARP act. Actually I don't even see why an executive order would be needed for ARRA money since the law already gave him authority to spend it for recovery purposes...
Apparently, the Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. Presidents can use executive orders to clarify laws passed by Congress or to ensure that a law is carried out -- but executive orders cannot be used to make new law or to change the mandate of existing laws. In the case of federal unemployment benefits, adding a new Tier or extending expired benefits would entail "making new law."

Background:
Until the 1950s, there were no rules or guidelines outlining what the president could or could not do through an Executive Order. However, the Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution. Presidents since this decision have generally been careful to cite which specific laws they are acting under when issuing new Executive Orders.

List of United States federal executive orders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW, a list of Barack Obama's Executive Orders to date is available at:
Executive order (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-19-2010, 12:28 PM
C.C
 
2,235 posts, read 1,047,797 times
Reputation: 460
[quote=diorgirl;14684997] Apparently, the Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. Presidents can use executive orders to clarify laws passed by Congress or to ensure that a law is carried out -- but executive orders cannot be used to make new law or to change the mandate of existing laws. In the case of federal unemployment benefits, adding a new Tier or extending expired benefits would entail "making new law."

/quote]

Ah good point - the original law explicitly stated the expiration date - that could hardly be "clarified" to a new date regardless of where the funding came from...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-19-2010, 12:58 PM
 
613 posts, read 540,260 times
Reputation: 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by diorgirl View Post
Apparently, the Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. Presidents can use executive orders to clarify laws passed by Congress or to ensure that a law is carried out -- but executive orders cannot be used to make new law or to change the mandate of existing laws. In the case of federal unemployment benefits, adding a new Tier or extending expired benefits would entail "making new law."

Background:
Until the 1950s, there were no rules or guidelines outlining what the president could or could not do through an Executive Order. However, the Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution. Presidents since this decision have generally been careful to cite which specific laws they are acting under when issuing new Executive Orders.

List of United States federal executive orders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW, a list of Barack Obama's Executive Orders to date is available at:
Executive order (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Executive Order (http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/TV/executive_order - broken link)

U.S. PRESIDENTIAL USAGE

Presidents (http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/TV/President_of_the_United_States - broken link) of the United States (http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/TV/United_States - broken link) have issued executive orders since 1789 (http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/TV/1789 - broken link) . There is no United States Constitution (http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/TV/United_States_Constitution - broken link) provision or statute that explicitly permits this, aside from the vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II (http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/TV/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution - broken link) , Section 1 of the Constitution and the statement "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" in Article II, Section 3.

Most executive orders are orders issued by the President to United States executive officers to help direct their operation, the result of failing to comply being removal from office. Some orders do have the force of law when made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress (http://www.informationdelight.info/encyclopedia/entry/TV/Congress_of_the_United_States - broken link) due to those acts giving the President discretionary powers.



I think an executive order for continuing unemployment benefits fits into "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed". HR4213 is a law that expired. The Presidents stance here could be that since Congress didn't extend the deadlines for the law, Congress didn't faithfully execute the law like they have multiple times by extending the deadlines. What, I think there has been 3 extensions of HR4213, correct me if I am wrong. Plus I don't think the Supreme Court will touch an executive order regarding unemployment benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 06-19-2010, 07:19 PM
 
600 posts, read 645,073 times
Reputation: 105
[quote=C.C;14685214]
Quote:
Originally Posted by diorgirl View Post
Apparently, the Supreme Court has ruled that U.S. Presidents can use executive orders to clarify laws passed by Congress or to ensure that a law is carried out -- but executive orders cannot be used to make new law or to change the mandate of existing laws. In the case of federal unemployment benefits, adding a new Tier or extending expired benefits would entail "making new law."

/quote]

Ah good point - the original law explicitly stated the expiration date - that could hardly be "clarified" to a new date regardless of where the funding came from...
He could easily change the mandate of the existing law. EOD.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $74,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Unemployment

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:25 AM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top