Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    25 Feb '15 03:03
    It is a continuous claim by right wingers that President Obama has greatly expanded executive power by executive orders. In fact:

    At the same time, Obama has averaged around 33 executive orders a year, the lowest rate since Grover Cleveland's first term ended in 1889, according to the American Presidency Project.

    http://news.yahoo.com/emboldened-obama-embraces-presidential-power-230609811.html

    The same article mentions that Obama has issued only two vetoes in over 6 years in office the lowest of any two term President since James Monroe about 200 years ago.

    There is RightWing World and reality.
  2. 25 Feb '15 03:17
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    It is a continuous claim by right wingers that President Obama has greatly expanded executive power by executive orders. In fact:

    At the same time, Obama has averaged around 33 executive orders a year, the lowest rate since Grover Cleveland's first term ended in 1889, according to the American Presidency Project.

    http://news.yahoo.com/emboldened-ob ...[text shortened]... term President since James Monroe about 200 years ago.

    There is RightWing World and reality.
    You fail to mention the massive amount of regulations coming from the Executive Branch these days which essentially are laws passed by unelected officials.

    You also seem to ignore the magnitude of the Executive Orders which he has chosen, including single handedly bypassing laws on illegal immigration.
  3. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    25 Feb '15 03:33
    Originally posted by whodey
    You fail to mention the massive amount of regulations coming from the Executive Branch these days which essentially are laws passed by unelected officials.

    You also seem to ignore the magnitude of the Executive Orders which he has chosen, including single handedly bypassing laws on illegal immigration.
    Your argument seems to be that Obama has passed executive orders which are bigger than the executive orders passed Presidents have enacted. In what way are his executive orders bigger than, for example, George W. Bush's? Or are you just desperately clutching at the first straw that you can find?
  4. 25 Feb '15 03:42
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    Your argument seems to be that Obama has passed executive orders which are bigger than the executive orders passed Presidents have enacted. In what way are his executive orders bigger than, for example, George W. Bush's? Or are you just desperately clutching at the first straw that you can find?
    Did "W"'s EO violate or challenge laws on the books?
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    25 Feb '15 13:58
    Originally posted by whodey
    You fail to mention the massive amount of regulations coming from the Executive Branch these days which essentially are laws passed by unelected officials.

    You also seem to ignore the magnitude of the Executive Orders which he has chosen, including single handedly bypassing laws on illegal immigration.
    Please cite a link showing the number of executive regulations coming from this administration v. other administrations.

    Thanks in advance.
  6. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    25 Feb '15 14:24
    Originally posted by whodey
    You fail to mention the massive amount of regulations coming from the Executive Branch these days which essentially are laws passed by unelected officials.

    You also seem to ignore the magnitude of the Executive Orders which he has chosen, including single handedly bypassing laws on illegal immigration.
    The last 5 Republicans Presidents issued 18 executive orders which altered immigration policies. http://www.pensitoreview.com/2014/11/17/impeachable-18-immigration-executive-orders-by-republican-presidents/
  7. 25 Feb '15 15:29 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Please cite a link showing the number of executive regulations coming from this administration v. other administrations.

    Thanks in advance.
    Can you read?

    I said that Executive Orders are not the only issue.

    The other issue is the regulatory beast now in place. It did not used to be this way and because of it, Obama does not need to sign off on as many Executive orders.

    I also commented on the fact that the Executive Orders he feels the need to sign, that is, the laws he can't pass through never ending Executive Regulations, has violated the laws on the books. Immigration is but one example, something he even said he did not have the power to do and would never do. There is also Obamacare. He he shoves this down our throats, says how great it is, divides the country, and then proceeds to pass Executive Orders bypassing his own law.

    Will the chickens ever come home to roost?

    I'm thinking you are better off starting another thread defending Mo.
  8. 25 Feb '15 15:41
    Originally posted by whodey
    Can you read?

    I said that Executive Orders are not the only issue.

    The other issue is the regulatory beast now in place. It did not used to be this way and because of it, Obama does not need to sign off on as many Executive orders.

    I also commented on the fact that the Executive Orders he feels the need to sign, that is, the laws he can't pass throu ...[text shortened]... ver come home to roost?

    I'm thinking you are better off starting another thread defending Mo.
    Can you quantify how the "regulatory beast" used to be and how it compares to the current day?
  9. 25 Feb '15 17:49 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    Can you read?

    I said that Executive Orders are not the only issue.

    The other issue is the regulatory beast now in place. It did not used to be this way and because of it, Obama does not need to sign off on as many Executive orders.

    I also commented on the fact that the Executive Orders he feels the need to sign, that is, the laws he can't pass throu ...[text shortened]... ver come home to roost?

    I'm thinking you are better off starting another thread defending Mo.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedure_Act

    "The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Pub.L. 79–404, 60 Stat. 237, enacted June 11, 1946, is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations."

    Momentum for this act started in earnest during the FDR era. Before you blame Obama, or slightly more rationally, FDR, consider that "Based on one study, Roosevelt commented that the practice of creating administrative agencies with the authority to perform both legislative and judicial work "threatens to develop a fourth branch of government for which there is no sanction in the Constitution.""

    Since this act has been in place since 1946, it is hard to see how Obama's low EO count could be due to a recent increase in regulatory bestiality.
  10. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    25 Feb '15 18:12
    Originally posted by whodey
    Can you read?

    I said that Executive Orders are not the only issue.

    The other issue is the regulatory beast now in place. It did not used to be this way and because of it, Obama does not need to sign off on as many Executive orders.

    I also commented on the fact that the Executive Orders he feels the need to sign, that is, the laws he can't pass throu ...[text shortened]... ver come home to roost?

    I'm thinking you are better off starting another thread defending Mo.
    Yes I can read. Can you?

    You tried to answer my OP by claiming that there had been a vast increase in executive regulations under Obama. I asked you to provide evidence supporting that claim by providing a link comparing the number of regulations promulgated under Obama v. the number of regulations promulgated under other administrations.

    You failed to do so.

    Whether particular EOs have violated specific laws in a matter of dispute. These disputes are properly resolved by the judiciary. Surely you are not going to claim that previous administrations have not had EOs overturned as illegal or unconstitutional?

    The fact of the matter remains that Obama has been sparse compared to other Presidents in using his Executive powers as shown by the evidence provided which stands unrefuted by you.
  11. 26 Feb '15 13:10 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Yes I can read. Can you?

    You tried to answer my OP by claiming that there had been a vast increase in executive regulations under Obama. I asked you to provide evidence supporting that claim by providing a link comparing the number of regulations promulgated under Obama v. the number of regulations promulgated under other administ ...[text shortened]... s in using his Executive powers as shown by the evidence provided which stands unrefuted by you.
    Please cite where I said Obama passed more regulations.

    As with Executive Orders, the issue is not necessarily the number as it is the scope of the power each Executive Order grabs. For example, Obama could pass one Executive Order giving him power over the universe.

    Here is a taste from an article I found regarding regulations Obama has passed.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One week after he signed Executive Order No. 13563, mandating that all executive branch agencies “identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens,” President Obama delivered his 2011 State of the Union Address: “When we find rules that put an unnecessary burden on businesses, we will fix them,” the chief executive declared on Jan. 25, to applause from the joint session of Congress.

    Yet over the course of the year that ensued, a new study finds, the Obama administration enacted 32 new “major” regulations – rules that carry an estimated price tag of $100 million or more. These measures stand to cost the U.S. economy $10 billion a year, along with an additional $6.6 billion in first-time implementation costs.










    Federal data marshaled in “Red Tape Rising,” a report by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, convey an even starker picture of regulatory growth during the Obama administration’s first three years. Since January 2009, 106 new “major” regulations have been enacted, at a total estimated cost of $46 billion, plus almost $11 billion more in implementation costs.

    This track record leads the study’s author, Heritage senior fellow James Gattuso, to label President Obama “the No. 1” regulator in American history.

    “Now, there is some competition – and competition not just from Democrats, but from Republicans,” Gattuso hastened to add, in an interview with Fox News. “Both of the Bushes engaged in a lot of regulation, if you look at the record. But on present track, President Obama may be the most pro-regulation president we have ever had."

    The greatest number of new major regulations issued last year – a full dozen of them – sprang from the massive overhaul of the financial services sector known as “Dodd-Frank,” a law sponsored by then-Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts and signed into law by Obama.

    The most expensive new regulations, however, emanated from the Environmental Protection Agency, which issued four “major” rules costing the U.S. economy an estimated $4 billion a year.

    Spending outlays for the nation’s major federal regulatory agencies has grown with breathtaking speed over the last half-century – and under presidents of both parties. Such expenditures totaled $533 million under President Kennedy; reached $7.29 billion by the middle of Jimmy Carter’s on term in office; skyrocketed to $25.49 billion by the end of the 1990s; and are projected at $57.33 billion for the end of this year.

    “There's a predisposition among agencies, both under Republican control and Democratic control, to expand regulation,” Gattuso told Fox News. “If you're not doing that, you feel like you're not doing your job.”

    Supporters of the Obama White House contend that studies like the Heritage Foundation’s can never quantify the savings amassed when a given regulation does its job: prevents an outbreak of E. coli that would devastate the American beef industry, for example, or averts another oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, with its catastrophic effects on energy, tourism and other sectors of the economy.

    “I think the real question is not how many regulations [President Obama] did, but how good they were, how smart they were,” says Scott Lilly, a veteran of three decades on Capitol Hill who is now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal Washington think tank. “I think [regulation] is driven much more by the events of the times that we live in than it is by the ideology of whoever's in the White House.”
  12. 26 Feb '15 13:12
    Originally posted by JS357
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedure_Act

    "The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Pub.L. 79–404, 60 Stat. 237, enacted June 11, 1946, is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations."

    Momentum for this act start ...[text shortened]... see how Obama's low EO count could be due to a recent increase in regulatory bestiality.
    I make no distinction between FDR and Obama. They are the same person.
  13. 26 Feb '15 13:13
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    The last 5 Republicans Presidents issued 18 executive orders which altered immigration policies. http://www.pensitoreview.com/2014/11/17/impeachable-18-immigration-executive-orders-by-republican-presidents/
    The GOP is nothing more than an extension of the democrat party.

    I could care less about them.
  14. 26 Feb '15 13:28
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Please cite a link showing the number of executive regulations coming from this administration v. other administrations.

    Thanks in advance.
    I can't seem to find anything on line in today's state run media.

    Go figure.

    But I did find this.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    How Many Federal Regulations are There?
    According to the Office of the Federal Register, in 1998, the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the official listing of all regulations in effect, contained a total of 134,723 pages in 201 volumes that claimed 19 feet of shelf space. In 1970, the CFR totaled only 54,834 pages.

    The General Accountability Office (GAO) reports that in the four fiscal years from 1996 to 1999, a total of 15,286 new federal regulations went into effect. Of these, 222 were classified as "major" rules, each one having an annual effect on the economy of at least $100 million.

    While they call the process "rulemaking," the regulatory agencies create and enforce "rules" that are truly laws, many with the potential to profoundly effect the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans. What controls and oversight are placed on the regulatory agencies in creating the federal regulations?

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So the US went from 54,834 pages of regulations to 134,723 from 1970 to 1998 alone. God only knows how many there are now.

    I could really care less about Obama. He is just an empty suit in a federal system that has been dedicated to the destruction of freedom for some time now.

    And like I said, you could pass one Executive Order giving you full power and authority over the entire universe, so just merely counting them is idiotic. I could also pass a billion Executive Orders stating each Executive Order gives the President the power to pluck one leaf off a tree.
  15. 26 Feb '15 13:30
    The corrosive effect of the regulation industry upon democracy cannot be under scored. Here we have an army of bureaucrats making laws who are not elected.

    Those who favor such a system favor tyranny.