Any BO supporter, can you explain?

H

Horn6721

Hook'em
Clearly I am too out of the loop of BO's strategy to understand BUT
the BO admin delayed by a year the requirement that employers are MANDATED to offer Obama insurance to all full time employees>
WE all agree this happened, right?

so why would BO do this?
"President Obama would veto a House bill aimed at legally delaying the employer mandate for a year, the White House announced on Tuesday, even though his administration has already issued a regulation embracing the delay.

On July 2, the Department of Treasury announced it would delay until 2015 a provision of Obamacare that requires larger employers to provide acceptable health insurance or pay a penalty. But it wasn’t clear that the administration had the legal authority to do so, as the text of Obamacare states that the mandate, “shall apply to months beginning after December 31, 2013.”

Thus, Republicans have introduced a bill in the House to codify into law the delay that Obama already supports. They have also proposed legislation that would extend the same delay to individuals required to purchase government-approved health insurance or pay a tax.
But Obama is prepared to veto both bills, according to a White House statement."The Link


BO's reasoning seems to be this law isn't necessary. You'd think he'd try to make political hay out of the GOP passing something he has already said he was going to do.

There must be something in this he doesn't like.
ANY supporters. Why is he against this?

Even BI, who we know is a libertarian< wink wink> do you know why he would veto this?
 
I have not heard a clear argument, but one perspective that says the President can declare a law invalid on Constitutional grounds but not for "just because" reasons.

That said, the dialog lately has been that if a President can delay or nullify parts of a law passed by Congress, and signed by the Executive Branch... then pray what would he do with an Immigration Bill that has many parts? He could, based on this recent example, nullify -- for example -- border security parts. Nullify or delay indefinitely.

All together it puts Congress on alert that any law passed is subject to Executive override on parts or all of it. Therefore what can Congress depend on with regard to any legislation?
 
The relationship between Obama and the House of Representatives is pissy and spiteful. It's not necessarily good for the country, but GOP Congressmen in safe districts build political capital that way, while Obama benefits the national Democratic pary by being the victim of their spite and doing all sorts of passive-agressive stuff to earn it.

It's sure unpleasant to watch. In a small town I knew some elderly spinster sisters. They lived together their whole lives but whenever i saw them intereact the were pissy and spiteful with each other, even while being nice to most everyone else. i guess maybe psychologist could explain such a dysfunctional relationship.
 
Clean
So BO will veto legislation that supports what he already declared would be done
and he is doing it so he won't look bad?

I would think even to people who get their news from Stevie Wonder would " wonder" what BO is thinking. This may be too cute for most of his supporters.
 
Paso
it has not which makes it all the more bizarre that BO would come out and say he would veto it.

You have to admit BO saying he would veto legislation that declares the same intent as an action BO has already announced is bizarre.
 
It is not bizarre at all. It all part of the pissing contest between the Executive branch and Legislative branch dating back a couple hundred years. You can add to it the pissing match between the Republicans in the House and Obama. This is not strange at all. Turf war.
 
^^^ This is part of the war that Obama declared on the Constitution years ago.
 
paso?
can you name another instance where a bill echoing what a POTUS had declared was passedbut the POTUS said he would veto?
A bill that supports the same thing as a POTUS declared,
has there ever been a time when the POTUS said he would veto a bill that declared the same thing the POTUS declared as action?
 
How would I track something like this?

I would say the War Powers Act is analogous and I am certain there have been plenty of pissing contests between the Executive Branch and Legislative branch.
 
I would assume only Congress has the ability to delay any part of the law since they are the ones who passed the stupid thing. How can Treasury dept just decide to delay part of a law?
 
paso?
You make the statement that this incident( BO threatening to veto legislation that does the same thing he declared he would do) isn't bizarre at all. that it has gone on for a couple of hundred years

Then when asked for another incident like this you ask us how you would track it?
And you cite the War Powers act as analogous. Explain how it relates to what BO has threatened to do vis a vis any legislation delaying the employer mandate for a year.


I am not sure you understand what is going on.
 
You don't read real well. I stated that a turf war between the Executive branch and the Legislative branch dates back over 200 years.

The modern battle (or the Executive branch part of it) is called the Imperial Presidency in political science and there are lots of books on it. You can google it if you want. Bush made elaborate signing statements indicating which parts of laws he would and would not enforce. There are even court cases exploring the contours of where Legislative power intersects with Executive power and how far each side can go.

This is hardly something new, but by all means fire up the impeachment bus again. You guys are laughable.
 
You are the joke, you act like you are some expert in the field of government and past laws or acts and you don't even have the first clue. What did you get your Law degree from a Cracker Jack Box or Law School Online for Obama Jockey Short Wearers?
 
paso
WHY would a BO veto legislation that validates and affirms what he has declared he will do?

That makes him look like a fool.
I know I know he IS a fool
but by vetoing legislation that only echoes what he said he would do he risks confusing his supporters.

What battle is there when the house is agreeing with him?
 
Didn't Bush threaten to pull the troops out of Iraq if congress declared war? That would seem to be similar if it happened.
 
I wonder what law school I received my law degree from?

hookem.gif
 
Paso -- No fair reading books!

If we need to know something it will be delivered in a sound bite on Fox News or conservative talk radio.
 
^^^ Then stick with your msnbc. That'll really enlighten you.
rolleyes.gif
 
Paso
What point are you trying to make?
BO declared that his admin would DELAY the employer mandate for a year.
The House passed a piece of legislation that would delay the employer mandate for a year.
BO announces he will veto that lege if is passes the Senate.

Why would BO veto something he has already announced he wanted to do?
 
This is really going over your head?

The point is that the President is asserting that he has the power to Administratively delay the implementation of a portion of the Affordable Healthcare Act. He also would indicate that he would veto it in an effort to influence the Senate. The President asserting more and more power is hardly some new issue and no president grabbed more power than George W. Bush. Obama has certainly not relinquished any of it. I admire the Right's new found allegiance to the Constitution and separation of powers (this is sarcastic in case you cannot tell).
 
Paso.... wouldn't waste too much time with 6721 and majorsourapples!!! They are so up their own pub's ***! They're funny little boys!


laugh.gif
 
paso
let me see if I understand this and if i don't perhaps you can try to explain it another way cause as we see I am just a simple 'boy"
1. BO announces he will delay the employer mandate ( I won't even go into WHY the delay is needed)
2. The House passes legislation that agrees with what BO announced and codifies it.
3. BO announces that he will veto the legislation that affirms his intentions so the Senate WON'T vote to support his decision.

is that pretty much it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top