|
|
Post by The Inspector on Jun 18, 2019 13:05:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Drifter on Jun 18, 2019 15:14:33 GMT -5
I don't see a problem with what she is suggesting. Giving Congress 100 days to get their act together and pass reasonable gun safety laws or else.
I'm all for background checks and the renewal on the assault weapons ban. And, I like her idea that if a gun dealer breaks the law, they'll loose their license to sell.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Inspector on Jun 19, 2019 0:06:24 GMT -5
I am real tired of running the country being run on "or else"
Laws come slowly you need to bring the American people along with the idea.
The idea of forcing half the people to do that there do not want is just what tramp is doing and I do not like it.
Making Quick laws will cause a backlash. I know the youth are impatient.
The time will come if we work at it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Warrigal on Jun 19, 2019 1:29:28 GMT -5
Ruling by executive order sounds to me too much like ruling by decree.
That is what absolute monarchs and dictators do.
IMO this should not happen in anything but a national emergency and should be subject to a sunset clause of some kind.
|
|
|
|
Post by 2old on Jun 19, 2019 5:41:13 GMT -5
Ruling be executive order was implemented early in the Obama administration. Immediately upon his election the Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. faux Congressional advisor corps shut down our government. They threatened that if any Republican in Congress supported a single thing Obama brought forward, they would see to it the "followers" voted them out of office. Nothing... NOTHING the Dems in Congress or the POTUS suggested was moved forward.
The current White House resident saw the power available in the use of executive orders. He could claim that power and display his "magic marker" signature on order after order regardless of what Congress did. In the meantime, McConnell stuck his head so far up Trump's fanny he couldn't see out. Bills passed in the House are not being brought to the floor of the Senate. Total and complete government shut down.
Congress will not vote to restrict executive orders. Would be political suicide if "their" POTUS was restricted from using EO's. With the current hard party line division in Congress, the only solution would be term limits in Congress and overturning Citizens United. If our Congressional representatives did not have to worry about getting re-elected for life... they could concentrate more on doing the people's business than running a campaign while in office.
|
|
|
|
Post by notmydad on Jun 19, 2019 7:55:41 GMT -5
Executive orders have been used by every president except WH Harrison. Executive orders were not numbered until the Lincoln administration. FDR issued over 3,500 executive orders. Reagan has the highest number of e/o's since 1960 at 381. In less than 2.5 years trump has issued around 110. I have no problem with presidents using this tool reasonably. I don't trust trump to do so. The courts must be the barrier to presidents abusing the privilege. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order |
|
|
|
Post by Warrigal on Jun 19, 2019 7:57:06 GMT -5
Under the Australian constitution all power resides in the parliament. The Governor General is largely a ceremonial office. He/she is appointed, not elected, and the chief function is to symbolically represent the monarch who is the formal head of state. Duties include opening parliament, appointing but not selecting the prime minister and other ministers, the signing of all legislation that has passed through both houses, making speeches etc. It is a non political, non partisan position. The Australian GG has one other power. He can dismiss a parliament that is deadlocked and call for a new election. This happened in 1975 when the Whitlam government was unable to get its budget passed in the Senate. The opposition party which had a majority in the senate refused to present the budget for a vote and the government was about to run out of money. The GG dismissed the prime minister, handed the opposition leader the prime ministership so that the budget could be passed on the condition that there will be an immediate election. It was something of a constitutional crisis at the time but we all voted, there was a change of government and we moved on although the GG was reviled by many and was effectively hounded out of office. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis |
|
|
|
Post by butterfly on Jun 21, 2019 1:41:34 GMT -5
The governing by executive order is Trump's way of end running the congress, usurping its powers and thus getting around the separation of powers as envisioned in the Constitution.
Constitutionally, making laws is the business of the legislative branch, i.e., congress, and NOT the business of the president. As Warri said above, Trump is acting like a monarch (he wishes!) or a dictator. This kind of behavior is what the Founding Fathers so much wanted to prevent by setting up the separation of powers system.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Inspector on Jun 21, 2019 12:54:35 GMT -5
Executive orders should be used to only help to make Congresses laws work and should be limit to that.
States of emergency is another problem and should have a time limit and there should be not veto. Unless Congress is physically unable to vote.
|
|
