President Obama challenged congressional Republicans to embrace the "shared responsibility" of governance even as the White House appears ready to use unilateral executive powers to battle Capitol Hill. With Republicans taking over the House and increasing their number in the Senate, Obama faces the possibility of having his agenda stalled with limited room to maneuver -- making for tough sledding in the two years leading up to his 2012 re-election bid.
In response, Obama is expected to make more frequent use of executive orders, vetoes, signing statements and policy initiatives that originate within the federal agencies to maneuver around congressional Republicans who are threatening to derail initiatives he has already put in place, including health care reforms, and to launch serial investigations into his administration's spending.
"There is going to be an effort on the president's part to use [executive powers] to satisfy his base and institutionalize what he can," said John Kenneth White, professor of politics at the Catholic University of America.
This week, the Environmental Protection Agency begins regulating greenhouse gas emissions at some energy plants and factories -- a move Obama pushed for after his cap-and-trade environmental legislation stalled in Congress.
The move angered many Republicans, who are vowing to block the new regulations they say threatens the nation's fragile economic recovery and who objected to an end-run around the legislative process.
"It's unclear what recourse Republicans have, but I think you will see a lot of battles where Obama's nominees are held up over regulatory decisions that are not directly related," said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist and former Senate staffer. "The legislative branch really feels they should control the laws that affect people."
Obama said during his 2008 campaign that he wouldn't use signing statements, codicils presidents can attach to bills challenging or refusing to enforce parts of a law, the way his predecessor, President George W. Bush, did. But since taking office, Obama issued signing statements on budgetary matters, foreign aid, commission appointments and more -- along with a memorandum promising to use "restraint" whenever exercising that power.
Read more at the Washington Examiner
In response, Obama is expected to make more frequent use of executive orders, vetoes, signing statements and policy initiatives that originate within the federal agencies to maneuver around congressional Republicans who are threatening to derail initiatives he has already put in place, including health care reforms, and to launch serial investigations into his administration's spending.
"There is going to be an effort on the president's part to use [executive powers] to satisfy his base and institutionalize what he can," said John Kenneth White, professor of politics at the Catholic University of America.
This week, the Environmental Protection Agency begins regulating greenhouse gas emissions at some energy plants and factories -- a move Obama pushed for after his cap-and-trade environmental legislation stalled in Congress.
The move angered many Republicans, who are vowing to block the new regulations they say threatens the nation's fragile economic recovery and who objected to an end-run around the legislative process.
"It's unclear what recourse Republicans have, but I think you will see a lot of battles where Obama's nominees are held up over regulatory decisions that are not directly related," said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist and former Senate staffer. "The legislative branch really feels they should control the laws that affect people."
Obama said during his 2008 campaign that he wouldn't use signing statements, codicils presidents can attach to bills challenging or refusing to enforce parts of a law, the way his predecessor, President George W. Bush, did. But since taking office, Obama issued signing statements on budgetary matters, foreign aid, commission appointments and more -- along with a memorandum promising to use "restraint" whenever exercising that power.
Read more at the Washington Examiner
13 comments:
The SOB thinks he's the King!
As we see from 9:51, arguments for or against the merits of the policies aside, it seems to me that the right will paint this as evidence of a "socialist takeover" when in fact Obama is excercising powers either outlined in the constitution or previously approved by past legislative bodies. But I'm sure Republicans won't complain if some of those "activist judges" decide to strike down any Obama decisions.
9:51 - Were Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, et all, all thinking they were kings when they did the same thing?
If 11:21 can't or (won't) notice the pending problems our gov't is imposing on us, he/her and many others are a major part of our problems today. Take off the blinders for one minute and you may just realize what already has been forced on us. We (the people) voted for these people to make sound decisions and so far he is way off base. For example, why would he allow people from another nation to come to our country illegally. Legally-fine, illegally-no. Don't paint us as bad people just because there is a body that doesn't agree with his venue. Common sense should have told you all of this.
in fact...Obama is a Socialist
it is very well documented..who he is endeared to and who made him
1:01, it is always fair to say you don't agree with the Pres.'s decisions. What is not fair is to act as if these decisions are being "rammed through" or being imposed by a dictator when the Pres. is using the same powers wielded by his predecessors. Not to mention the Pres. seems to be pursuing the same general platform (healthcare, low middleclass taxes, tax the rich, environmental protection) that the majority of Americans voted him in for. So where's the "ramming" if he is doing exactly what he was elected on?
There is no question of what Obama is. He has bucked the will of the people.
TMDLs - it's an executive order from May 2009 that put the Chesapeake Bay on this so-called pollution diet that will cost taxpayers in six states and D.C. countless billions.
And not a penny was authorized by the taxing authority vested in Congress.
5:03, maybe you would simply like to lose "countless billions" as all the crabs and fish continue to die, ruining commerce here on the CB
At least Obama is being open about this, rather than the quasi-legal "signing statements" Bush used, where he stated he simply wouldn't enforce parts of laws he disagreed with. Talk about someone thinking he was king...
@ 3:47 not being "rammed through"?! Really, you must be kidding! Tell me then, if the healthcare bill was not "rammed through", how did it pass when the majority of Americans opposed it? Why do some of those who voted for the bill, still have very little idea of what includes?
9:58
#1 Americans are intellectually lazy and would rather have Rush/Olberman explain it to them
#2 Surveys showed that Americans liked the provisions of the bill but disliked the bill in it's entirety
#3 No. 2 is largely to do with false and irresponsible claims of "death panels" and "gov. takeover" by those seeking to score political points.
Seems to me you guys still can't reconcile the fact that this was a major pillar of the Dem platform in 08 which was successfully completed. Guess thats why you are really so angry.
the next elections can't get here fast enough to get rid of this guy. God help us if we are dumb enough in this country to re elect this communist.
Post a Comment