Obamacare legal question

F

FridayNiteLites

500+ Posts
It is a law, period. It has deadlines for implementation. How are they able to legally not enact a law? Wouldn't a court have to stop it? How are they able to say we aren't going to enforce it? It makes no sense to spend so much time and energy on a program and get to the point of implementation and then say "uh, we have a problem, we uh, better not enact this particular piece of the law, uh..." How can the Executive Branch wield this kind of power without oversight from the other two bodies of the triumvirate?
 
You asked a question many others have asked.
You won't get an answer and neither will any politician.

IF the MSM was still responsible they would also be asking.
I bet Walter Cronkite would have asked
 
Typically, legislation is implemented by the Executive Branch and the Secretary of the particular agency has discretion concerning the regulations and exceptions to the regulations.
 
No surprise that supporters would think it is ok for BO to do this.

The mess he has created both before he did this and now that he has done this should force even his most ardent supporters to question this. The very fact of the delay reveals the abomination obamacare really is
and this won't e the last revelation

Thankfully this will be discussed in Congress.
I do wonder how they can go ahead with the individual mandate now that they have delayed the company mandate.
 
It is no surprise that you do not understand how the government actually operates.

Maybe this "scandal" will be bigger than Watergate, Bengazi, IRS, and WW II combined!!!

laugh.gif
 
When topics like this come up, I am reminded of the expanse and power of just one branch of government. The Executive Branch.

Progressively over the years the Executive Branch has taken on more and more power. And manpower.

Average voter thinks of the Executive Branch -- that 1/3 of the three branches -- as just one man: the President.

Porr little President gamefully going up against all those legislatures, and often only helped out by nine judges. A few more realize it is also the Cabinet and related departments supporting those cabinets, including the massive Dept of Defense (Pentagon and military). So, one man, his small cabinet and the military/pentagon.

But they overlook that the Executive Branch is over 2 million strong staffing an enormous list of agencies and departments down the chain from the White House and Cabinet positions. Departments that can enforce such as Obamacare. And the IRS. And more.

I pulled this employee level data from Historic Government Workforce Tables, 2011. Converted some of it into branches and the pie chart. Here is the reference: Data, Analysis & Documentation: Federal Employment Reports -- link

Total (2011 numbers) civilian employees in Federal Govt: 2,820,000.
Almost 98% if those are under the Executive Branch. Hence, under the power of the President.

pie-govt-employees_zpsece86ca0.jpg


The uniformed military is separate from this. 1,583,000.

Try to keep in perspective that the Legislative and Judical Branches are really very tiny compared to the Excutive Branch. Only 64,000 employees -- less than 1% total Federal Civilian Employees, staff those two independent Branches of Government.

Only the Constitution and it's mandates of the separate but equal branches is keeping things together.

When Obama complains about Congress gumming up the works -- it's supposed to.

For my take, given the expansion of the powers and manpower of the Executive Branch, I want the Legislative Branch to keep reins on things.

And I am saddened they knee-jerked into passing the Affordable Healthcare Act two years ago. If only they would halt it completely.
 
what does it matter that the executive branch can pick and choose what laws they will enforce?
frown.gif
 
This is an inaccurate view of the Executive Branch and its discretion. With new laws, they almost always (I think it is always but I obviously have not read every law) allow for the Secretary of the agency to have discretion in implementing it along with allowing exceptions to the new regulations. There are numerous court cases exploring the contours of what an agency can and cannot do with regulations. You are welcome to read up on this. It is very complex because it involves the intersection and overlap of Legislative and Executive power as interpreted by the Judicial Branch.
 
WSJ is by subscription, so not everyone may be able to read this (though it may be a courtesy freebie).Today's editorial section, op-ed, WSJ, p.A13. A worthwhile read.

Obama Suspends the Law by Michael W. McConnell, former judge on U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Prof. of Law and Director of Constitutional Law Center at Sanford Law School, and a senior fellow at Hoover Institution.

Maybe they guy knows what he is talking about. It's a damn fine read, and one every voting American should be aware of.

Linky
In reply to:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the responses, the WSJ article was very enlightening and explanatory. That is just BS IMO. Laws are passed, and laws should be enforced. If they are bad laws, strike them from the books and rewrite them. From what I am gathering this is a ploy to get as many people started on Obamacare because businesses won't have to offer therefore putting them on the public dole and we know what happens when you want to take the freebies away. Sad, just sad that we have become such a welfare state.
 
This is all about 2014. Eat dessert first, before you realize that you are about to be royally screwed. Thank God for the low-information voters - they will have no clue (except for new goodies!)

As someone who would be disenfranchised (I am on SS) I wish that only those who pay for the goodies by working would get to vote. It is their money, after all. Unfortunately, that is never going to happen, and increasingly those who take are going to far outnumber those who pay.
brickwall.gif
 
There is a whole branch of government devoted to determining this issue. By all means, file suit.

Are you guys really complaining about a two year delay on a small portion of the law?
 
if 15000 pages isn't enough why not make it a million pages? what is so hard about this thing? set the exchanges up like they were supposed to be set up. go with the plan as passed. Why delay?

Furthermore, why allow any people, business' or organizations as well, to opt out? While we are at it shouldn't there be a mandate for Dr's to work 5 days a week and every other Saturday to make up for the shortages we will be seeing?

Shouldn't the Obamacare leadership work to nationalize the members of the AMA to force the Doctors to have a government license mandating their jobs and their hours? It seems only logical under Obamacare.

Get ready to ride "IT", doctors, Americans. The Link
 
Even unions have started to pay closer attention to this POS law. I thought most unions for waivers.
but this unions is running ads imploring BO to keep his promise, You know, " if you like your current insurance you can keep it."

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has an ad explaining how millions will get hurt if the obamacare isn't rewritten.The Link
"NOW IS THE TIME TO ACT
We urge the Obama administration and Congress to take steps that will allow multiemployer plans to continue providing quality coverage as the Affordable Care Act takes full effect."
 
Paso, I'm not complaining about delaying the implementation, it's about following the law. The law that BHO took an oath on to uphold, that kind of thing. The law that he wanted so badly that now he seems to not care for so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top