Ezra Klein is one of the best out there. Give a listen and discuss
I’ve posed this before in another thread but is what Trump doing actually illegal with all the powers that Congress has actually given the president? I didn’t think of it that way until Jon Stewart had a segment on it a couple of weeks back. I mean it smells and looks illegal, but is it actually?Congress has spent the last century or so giving away power to the executive branch.
Well past time to claw it back but that’d require doing boring stuff like hashing out detailed legislation. You know…actually doing their jobs.
In addition both parties aren’t interested in this at all unless the other party is in the White House. Been true for a century. That has to change but won’t.
Will be interesting to see what their first business is once the trump leadership appointments conclude this week. Tax revisions is my guess on immediateQUOTE="binsfeldcyhawk2, post: 12892753, member: 8394"]
Congress has spent the last century or so giving away power to the executive branch.
Well past time to claw it back but that’d require doing boring stuff like hashing out detailed legislation. You know…actually doing their jobs.
In addition both parties aren’t interested in this at all unless the other party is in the White House. Been true for a century. That has to change but won’t.
Will be interesting to see what their first business is once the trump leadership appointments conclude this week. Tax revisions is my guess on immediate business.QUOTE="binsfeldcyhawk2, post: 12892753, member: 8394"]
Congress has spent the last century or so giving away power to the executive branch.
Well past time to claw it back but that’d require doing boring stuff like hashing out detailed legislation. You know…actually doing their jobs.
In addition both parties aren’t interested in this at all unless the other party is in the White House. Been true for a century. That has to change but won’t.
Yeah, some of it very likely is. The Impoundment Act of 74 (that Klein referenced in your video above) specifically states that the president can't unilaterally nix congressionally approved spending just because he doesn't like it.I’ve posed this before in another thread but is what Trump doing actually illegal with all the powers that Congress has actually given the president? I didn’t think of it that way until Jon Stewart had a segment on it a couple of weeks back. I mean it smells and looks illegal, but is it actually?
I am hopeful that Congress in the future will try to rein this in and maybe they would if there were term limits in place. But then again I was hopeful the republicans would get their act together before 2024 and I was wrong.
Trumps exploiting all the powers given to the executive branch.I’ve posed this before in another thread but is what Trump doing actually illegal with all the powers that Congress has actually given the president? I didn’t think of it that way until Jon Stewart had a segment on it a couple of weeks back. I mean it smells and looks illegal, but is it actually?
I am hopeful that Congress in the future will try to rein this in and maybe they would if there were term limits in place. But then again I was hopeful the republicans would get their act together before 2024 and I was wrong.
“Impoundment authority” is gonna be the big ticket item for the SC.Yeah, some of it very likely is. The Impoundment Act of 74 (that Klein referenced in your video above) specifically states that the president can't unilaterally nix congressionally approved spending just because he doesn't like it.
We may be on a collision course with the SCOTUS on this one.
But, like you said, Congress isn't doing dick and that's concerning.
And agree on Klein, definitely produces perspectives worth paying attention to.
If I’m not mistaken the budget reconciliation needs to be done before Mid March so I assume that plus the the house just dropped their version.Will be interesting to see what their first business is once the trump leadership appointments conclude this week. Tax revisions is my guess on immediate business.
If the conservative scotus members, you know the usual flip floppers, look at this by the letter of the law then it will be settled in favor of Congress. But we have seen a whole lot of non-textual decisions go the conservative REpub way. And we have seen Supremes go directly against their nomination statements, lying to Congress, and Kavanaugh is the worst as he did it in 2 congressional nominations. Shame. They should have their stances firmly in place and answer truthfullyYeah, some of it very likely is. The Impoundment Act of 74 (that Klein referenced in your video above) specifically states that the president can't unilaterally nix congressionally approved spending just because he doesn't like it.
We may be on a collision course with the SCOTUS on this one.
But, like you said, Congress isn't doing dick and that's concerning.
And agree on Klein, definitely produces perspectives worth paying attention to.
They don’t have to work. Gerrymandering has made compromise impossible.Congress has spent the last century or so giving away power to the executive branch.
Well past time to claw it back but that’d require doing boring stuff like hashing out detailed legislation. You know…actually doing their jobs.
In addition both parties aren’t interested in this at all unless the other party is in the White House. Been true for a century. That has to change but won’t.
It’s not just gerrymandering that brought this about. It’s easy for them to hand over power. Legislating is hard work…why not pass it off to the executive branch? 🙃They don’t have to work. Gerrymandering has made compromise impossible.