Skip to main content

View Diary: Ted Cruz says we 'no longer have a president,' apparently because Barack Obama is now our dictator (138 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Two wrongs don't make a right (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MPociask

    Cruz might be a hypocrite but that doesn't mean he's wrong. The President either has statutory authority delegated by Congress to do something, or he does not. That's it.

    If the President can't point to either the Constitution or some statute passed by Congress authorizing him to do something, he can't do it, period.

    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

    by Sparhawk on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:37:20 AM PST

    •  He has the authority (6+ / 0-)

      The only changes Obama has made to the ACA roll-out are those he's legally able to make - as per the actual law passed by an actual Congress.

      If the good Senator from Alberta has proof that Obama has acted illegally, perhaps he might want to send that over to his buddies in the House. Something tells me they would love to have a basis for impeachment proceedings. Otherwise it's just more blathering from a self-important idiot.

      Cruelty might be very human, and it might be very cultural, but it's not acceptable.- Jodie Foster

      by CPT Doom on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:55:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I looked for the parts of ACA that give authority (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lefthandedmomma

        for the administration to delay the employer mandate or to change the law from having two groups of employers (above 50 FTE employees and below) to 3 groups (1 to 50, 51 to 100 and over 100).  I can't find them.

        Which sections of the ACA law give authority for these changes?

        The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

        by nextstep on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:58:06 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The authority of the Secretary of the Treasury (0+ / 0-)

          to issue regulations regarding reporting.

          "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

          by Old Left Good Left on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 11:07:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Please direct me to the specific section of ACA (0+ / 0-)

            that gives the Sec of Tres authority to make these specific changes.  ACA does not allow any and all changes that may be thought of by Sec of Tres or HHS.

            The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

            by nextstep on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 11:48:39 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  IRC §§ 6055 and 6056 (3+ / 0-)

              require that employers and issuers of health coverage provide information regarding offers of coverage and whether coverage meets the affordability and MEC criteria in the manner prescribed by the Secretary.

              The final regulations with respect to IRC §§ 6055 and 6056 were released yesterday.  The forms themselves have not been released.  In exercising its authority to prescribe the manner of reporting, the Secretary essentially waived the requirements of IRC §§ 6055 and 6056 until 2016.

              Since the IRS cannot easitly enforce IRC § 4980H without the reporting under IRC §§ 6055 and 6056, the Secretary has also waived, in the manner he sees fit, certain requirements under IRC § 4980H.  See IRC § 4980H(d)(1), which requires penalties under that section to be assessed by the Secretary.  Since the Secretary could have waived the requirements for all employers, it is within his power to waive them for some.

              "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

              by Old Left Good Left on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 12:42:53 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  So a future President could make the capital (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                lefthandedmomma

                gains tax effectively zero, by just holding up updating Schedule D for the next year - changing the tax year shown on the form is harder than one might think!  Some might say this does not fit with faithful execution of the law.

                Hard to believe that after 4 years the IRS could not design the form and update their IT.

                The real answer for the change is willfully failing to faithfully execute the law.

                The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                by nextstep on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:31:54 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Um, no (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Dodgerdog1, lefthandedmomma

                  But believe what you want.

                  "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

                  by Old Left Good Left on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:08:24 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Of course (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Dodgerdog1
                  The real answer for the change is willfully failing to faithfully execute the law.
                  After expending his political capital passing the ACA, the President then told Treasury, HHS, and Labor to slow-walk implementation at great political cost.

                  Makes perfect sense, I guess.  But only if you're an idiot.

                  "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

                  by Old Left Good Left on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:10:12 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So why do you think the forms for the employer (0+ / 0-)

                    Mandate are not ready 4 years after ACA became law?

                    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                    by nextstep on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:20 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Because (0+ / 0-)

                      the final regulations were issued yesterday?

                      "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

                      by Old Left Good Left on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:29:43 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You glossed over the fact that it took 4 years! (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        lefthandedmomma

                        The Empire State Building in NYC was built in less time than that.

                        I really dislike businesses getting a windfall of many tens of billions of dollars in avoiding employee healthcare spending (and made up by employees or employee penalties) and lost penalties from ACA non-compliant companies, because of the failure to implement the ACA employer mandate on schedule. This also puts a greater burden on millions of employees.

                        Even if there were unintentional administrative failures that compel delay in reporting for the employer mandate, the schedule for first reporting by business could be delayed to 2016, but companies could still be held responsible for providing ACA compliant healthcare or pay the penalty for 2014.

                        The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                        by nextstep on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:53:40 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I don't like it either (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          lefthandedmomma

                          But that doesn't make it unlawful, and it doesn't make the President a "dictator."

                          "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

                          by Old Left Good Left on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 05:26:03 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Do you also object to businesses getting tax (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          paulan

                          windfalls of other kinds?  I don't see you objecting to things like the carried interest deduction, farm subsidies that go to conglomerate agribusinesses, and a myriad of other windfalls for business at the expense of ordinary tax payers.  

                          I also don't see you remembering what a mess implementation of Medicare Part D was under the Bush administration.  This is complex litigation, and anyone with any intelligence would know that the process of writing and implementing rules and regulations would take quite a while, especially when so many different agencies are involved.  

                          •  It does dot take four years to do this (0+ / 0-)

                            The US won World War II in less time than it takes to implement the employer mandate.  Are you going to tell me implementing the employer mandate is more difficult than WWII?

                            Your comment on my not mentioning other tax windfalls is ridiculous, you must think a comment must address all issues.

                            The tax and healthcare spending windfall in this case is from administrative failure, as this is already law.  

                            The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                            by nextstep on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 01:24:15 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                •  hahahaha (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  lefthandedmomma

                  you are trying REALLY hard, lol.

                  don't worry, millions of people having health care wont' hurt you, mkay.

                  •  You must like the fact that Employers get (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    lefthandedmomma

                    a windfall from the delay in the ACA employer mandate, and employees pay billions more.

                    Businesses gain many tens of billions of dollars from not paying for otherwise mandated ACA employee health insurance or penalties for non-compliance, while millions of employees will need to make up all or part of the difference out of their own pocket to pay for insurance or pay a penalty from the individual mandate.

                    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                    by nextstep on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 05:00:33 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

    •  The Rule of Law - not a partisan punching bag (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lefthandedmomma

      I am with you.  And this is not limited to the ACA.  It's immigration law (where the President does a record number of deportments, but also by executive action implements the Dream Act), it's Libya (Congress has sole authority to declare war), it's a lot of things.

      I don't like it when any President does it.  We have three clearly delineated branches of government when it comes to law making authority.  

      Congress - legislative - make laws.
      President - executive - implement laws.
      Supreme Court - judicial - interpret laws.

      I don't like it when ANY branch starts doing the work of another branch.  If we have a dysfunctional Congress, and nothing is getting done... then we have a dysfunctional Congress, and we have to deal with that.  The Constitution doesn't allow for short cuts.

      •  Well (4+ / 0-)

        1.  Prosecutorial discretion is nearly absolute, as long as it is not discriminatory.  Priortizing prosecutions has always been the province of the executive branch. If the President doesn't want to waste prosecutorial resources on deporting children, he has that power.

        2.  Libya.  Seriously?  We have more than two centuries establishing that the President, as commander in chief and under the authority to conduct foreign affairs, can do a lot with the US military without infringing on Congress's war-making powers.  Get over it.

        "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

        by Old Left Good Left on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:11:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  War was never declared in Libya. (0+ / 0-)

        Nor in Grenada or Panama, or even Iraq for that matter.

        There were no U.S. troops committed in Libya.

        The U.S. played a support role - stand-off radar reconnaissance via AWACS, and refueling of NATO aircraft FULFILLING OUR TREATY OBLIGATIONS AS A MEMBER OF NATO. We flew no missions over Libya. For all intents and purposes this was no different for our military than any training and preparedness operation.

        Which part of the immigration question bothers you? The Dream Act, which will allow children brought to this country by their parents to attend college and become contributing members of our society, and eventually attain a path to citizenship?
        Or the fact that this President has deported more undocumented aliens than any Republican? You can't have it both ways.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site