we must remain engaged and level-headed
He could strengthen the gun free zone Federal statutes to put an end to concealed carry by teachers in states such as Utah. I hope he doesn't but that is within their power to take away the state exemption for concealed carry. That would just make the issue worse but is within the reach of an EO. I would just as soon see what we are dealing with soon, all we can do is speculate now which obviously is fraught with inaccuracies.One I can think of right off the top of my head that would actually do something and be achievable through executive order is.....
Enforce the existing laws. Prosecute people who break them. I don't agree with some of the existing federal laws a la gun-free-zones, but that's not going to change any time soon. What's the point of creating new federal crimes when violations of existing law are rarely prosecuted at the federal level?
Matt
That is the problem, he can "strengthen" existing laws or remove exemptions stated in existing laws.The fundamental issue here is that part of the nation wants to go for more gun control (and they are concentrated in certain states).
Others want to lessen gun control here (such as ending the gun free zones entirely, or atleast removing schools from the list) and they are concentrated in other states.
Anything done by the Federal government, any action Obama takes will smack of telling those in the states mentioned secondly what to do.
That is, provided he simply sticks to EOs inside of already established legislation.
He could modify the existing code:"He could strengthen the gun free zone Federal statutes to put an end to concealed carry by teachers in states such as Utah. I hope he doesn't but that is within their power to take away the state exemption for concealed carry"
How?
State reciprocity agreements
Although the Federal GFSZA does provide an exception for an individual licensed to carry a firearm, this exception only applies in the State that physically issued the permit.[2][11][14][15] Forty-nine States, all but Illinois, have provisions to issue concealed carry permits to citizens.[16] Most of these States also enter into reciprocity agreements with other States where each State agrees to recognize the other's concealed carry permits.[16] Because the Federal GFSZA requires the permit be issued by the State which the school zone is in, it is difficult for a permit holder to travel outside their State of issuance to a reciprocating State without violating the Federal GFSZA.[2][11][14][15]
No. He absolutely cannot do that.remove exemptions stated in existing laws.
Once again, until he shows his hand, it is all speculation.
He could modify the existing code:
Let me see, can't ignore existing laws? Are you serious? Really, how about DOMA, how about annual budget, etc? No, he does and will continue to selectively enforce what he wants to, there is no longer anyone to restrain him.No. He absolutely cannot do that.
Nope. We know for a fact he can't do that either. You keep posting these claims but you don't understand that HE CAN NOT WRITE LAW. He can't change written law, write new ones, or ignore laws as written.
He has lots of latitude on how to enforce them, within the way they are written, but he can't break them. In any law there is lots of grey area on how to enforce it, but he can't change the black/white parts of the law or write new parts. That's Congress's job. POTUS does not have that power. Never did, never will.
Why not? Once again, that was an example by pure speculation, I have no evidence that he plans to do this, but what would restrain him from doing this should he choose to do so?State permit, good in same state school.
He cannot change that by EO.
Sigh... With hope that we might all learn something...Let me see, can't ignore existing laws? Are you serious? Really, how about DOMA, how about annual budget, etc? No, he does and will continue to selectively enforce what he wants to, there is no longer anyone to restrain him.
He can't write new laws? Huh, oh really, then what was the EO creating his Dream Act?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpoli...a-did-what-presidents-do-act-without-congress
In any case, show me where an Obama EO has been overturned if it so easy to overturn and restrain him? Just one please.
Joe, this is getting old, but one more time:Sigh... With hope that we might all learn something...
DOMA (not an executive order); "May 2012, the First Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed Tauro's ruling that section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act#Congressional_intervention
Annual budget? (also not an EO) Written by Congress, passed by Congress, spent by Congress.
Dream Act (not an act, not EO, not law) "exercise of our prosecutorial discretion," http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/...on-individuals-who-came-to-us-as-children.pdf
... and it's being challenged in court (the way it's supposed to work); http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...suit-against-napolitano-over-amnesty-program/
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/24/us/immigration-lawsuit/index.html
As for which of Obama's EO that have been overturned, I'm not aware of any that need to be. Can you cite one? So far you haven't. Just wild claims that don't hold up.
4) Abuse of Presidential Power - Many sources on this, here is one:Article I of the U.S. Constitution requires Congress to pass a federal budget. Despite the clear priority the Constitution gives to maintaining discipline in federal spending, the last time Congress enacted a budget was April 29, 2009 – almost 3 years ago!
Further underscoring the crucial importance of fiscal control, the Congressional Budget Act requires the president to submit a budget to Congress by February 1 every year. Under federal law, the House and Senate are mandated to reach agreement on a concurrent budget resolution by April 15 of each year.
But this administration has made a MOCKERY of this crucial requirement:
President Obama’s last half-hearted attempt to submit a budget was defeated by the Senate 97-0 (yes, even Senate Democrats easily saw through the President’s sham effort).
Sorry, but the Dream Order is even more scary when you consider it was ONLY a memo to the INS, you are right, not an official EO. In other words, his MEMO carried the weight of law. Why does that not bother you even more than his "official" EO's? In other words, by his proclamation only!!Your citing places where he failed to do his duty, but what EO's did he issue on those topics?
The two things are not the same.
Dear Joe,You're right, it's gotten old. I post facts, you post wild claims with no facts.
EO all have numbers. You claim he has made many that make law, violate law, etc. Please post ONE or more. Numbers please.
Everything else you've posted has turned out to not be an EO, and not "unConstitutional".
By the way, Article I says "Congress" must write and pass a budget. The POTUS only job is to submit a suggestion (not in the Constitution, but later law). They can throw it away and he can go on vacation to let them figure it out (which he did). The President has NO responsibility on passing a budget, that's Congress's job.
Read it for your self instead of relying on some pundit to spin it for you;
"Section. 7.
All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States;[2] If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.
Section. 8.The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "
You posted that he submited a budget, as required. What part did he ignore? Congress writes the budget and passes it, then the President signs it, if he feels like it, or not if he doesn't. I don't know why you think the President has some responsiblity here he has failed. See quote below;Dear Joe,
I already listed above that the Presidential duty is by the Congressional Budget Act. Are you stating that he can ignore that law?
Where? You keep making that claim but when I look them up, it turns out to not be true.Sorry, but I have listed many instances where Obama has made laws and ignored laws.
...His [Obama's] options are limited," Adam Winkler, constitutional scholar at the UCLA School of Law, said by phone Friday. "He can seek to better enforce existing federal law, but he can't act contrary to existing federal law....