I think his point is a valid one. If the Executive can postpone or not enforce a law then what would stop a President from directing the IRS to not enforce a certain tax law or just not enforcing any other law?
I’m less concerned about it than wanting to establish the new ground rules. If a President has that kind of power, then I’m not going to want one of my Presidents to pass on using it. Republican Presidents could get a lot done by having that kind of discretion.
I think this is all a clever plan. Obama wants the Health Care program to get going. Republicans oppose the plan and are trying to delay it. So what does Obama do? He announces he’s postponing enforcement of it.
The Republicans, as usual, knee jerk oppose anything Obama says. So they now demand that the Health Care plan be immediately and fully enforced and how dare Obama suggest otherwise! They’ll show Obama who’s in charge! He doesn’t want to be thrown in the briar patch? Well that’s exactly where they’ll throw him!
Seriously, though, I think both sides are thinking politically instead of what is best for the country. I believe Obama is afraid that the employer mandate will have negative effects on hiring and full-time employment and he wants to put it off until after the midterms. The Republicans, although they constantly talk about getting rid of the law, seem to want the pain to be felt before the midterms so they can make gains.
ISTM that if the Republicans were serious about opposing the ACA then the House could cut funding for the program. I would think that there are enough like-minded Republicans to attempt this approach. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the members of Congress are concerned with nothing more than self-preservation.
Republicans are refusing to fund the ACA, beyond what the law already appropriates. And that’s entirely appropriate. Democrats said the law reduces the deficit, it can’t very well reduce the deficit if it has to keep coming back for more money. They should have included 100% of the necessary funding in the law itself, rather than gaming the CBO.
What are they refusing to fund? They could have blocked funding in the March CR but didn’t. They could block funding for hiring the new IRS agents required by the law to enforce it. In theory, they could demand that HHS not spend any time working on the rollout. Everything they have done so far has been symbolic…much like the (how many?) House votes to repeal Obamacare.
Sophistry, and not very good sophistry at that. Budgetary funds are not fungible, so even if the ACA saves billions of dollars from Medicare, that doesn’t mean that it’s going to end up in the budgets necessary to support the implementation, even if those budgets were orders of magnitude smaller.
Section 4980H of the ACA states:
The reporting requirements are in Sections 6055 and 6056. 6056 states
6055 states
Seems to me that the Secretary gets to decide when the penalties are demanded and when the reporting is required. But IANAL.
And it’s 37 or 38 votes to repeal, so far, but Boehner promised another one earlier today.
You can get to the full text of the sections I cited here: 26 U.S. Code § 6055 - Reporting of health insurance coverage | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
Your tax dollars at work, ladies and gentlemen.
So okay, a future Republican President can basically not enforce the employer mandate at all. Good to know.
And there have not been over 30 votes to repeal. Speaking of talking points that get accepted as true because some people only read sources from one side of the political spectrum.
And from ABC News: “The House of Representatives voted today to repeal the entire Affordable Care Act, 229-195. This was the third vote for full repeal, and the 37th overall vote the House has taken to disrupt, dismantle, defund or repeal parts of the Affordable Care Act.”
Being who you are, you will no doubt quibble over the phrase “full recall”, but the fact of the matter is that on 37 occasions, the House has wasted its time and taxpayers money attempting to make sure that many Americans don’t have affordable health care, and they’ve done this knowing full well that it was an empty gesture.
ABC reported it accurately. One of the few.
The reason I quibble is because not all those repeal votes were merely symbolic. The repeal of the CLASS Act, for example, was signed by the President.
As you already knew, because your favored Presidential candidate spelled out very clearly how he planned to do just that and more.