Every expansion of executive or judicial authority ends up becoming the norm. This President rewrites laws on the fly to suit his party's electoral needs? Tomorrow the other party will. This President issues executive decrees that last year he characterized as unconstitutional? Next time the other party will. Wapo'a editorial board provides a wonderfull example:
It is 2017. Newly elected President Ted Cruz (R) insists he has won a mandate to repeal Obamacare. The Senate, narrowly back in Democratic hands, disagrees. Mr. Cruz instructs the Internal Revenue Service not to collect a fine from anyone who opts out of the individual mandate to buy health insurance, thereby neutering a key element of the program. It is a matter of prosecutorial discretion, Mr. Cruz explains; tax cheats are defrauding the government of billions, and he wants the IRS to concentrate on them. Of course, he is willing to modify his order as soon as Congress agrees to fix what he considers a “broken” health system.
Eventually the only thing that will matter in our politics is who Caesar is. And we know that story ends.
What a preventable disaster. Glen Kessler at Wapo demonstrates using the Constitutional Scholar in Chief's own testimony from the past how constitutionally criminal his amnesty will be. At the link.
No comments:
Post a Comment