3 ms·

There's an unsettling aspect to this story that is being glossed right over: This is, what should have been, a simple bit of congressional legislation that coul

There's an unsettling aspect to this story that is being glossed right over: This is, what should have been, a simple bit of congressional legislation that could/should have been drafted in the House or Senate and sent to the president for signing. Yet it had to be drafted as an executive order. Why is the legislative branch so willing to give up the power of the pen to the president? What the hell is going on? This feels like a huge breakdown in the responsibilities of the federal government.

ilikehurdles 7y ago
Outside of funding for the ministry of war, Mitch McConnell will not allow a vote or (when possible) even debate on anything the democratic sides of Congress support, and any bill of this nature would have been supported by both parties.
SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
Excuse me for being a little cynical... But I find the timing a little convenient that only after 2016 are people concerned about Executive Orders and presidential overreach. I'm sure this comment will be followed up with someone saying "nah I've been concerned" and that may be true, but let's look at the common mode here. It's like the people arguing for bigger government are many of the same people arguing against government when it's someone they don't like in power and can't see past their own noses on this.
- dclowd9901 7y ago
  Oh good, a whataboutism. Not enough of those, lately. I'm not everyone, and it is something that's of deep concern to me, as it should be to you. So feel free to shelve your cynicism and join me in asking our representatives to do better.
  - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
    A whataboutism would be if the topics weren't directly related. How is this that? Let me help you out. A "whataboutism" would be if I made a post saying "Well, Trump did this one good thing, but Obama passed Credit Card Reforms!" See how those are non-sequitur?
beat 7y ago
Well, why was it drafted? For the good of consumers? Or as part of a re-election campaign, a promise to "do something" in the face of the hard reality that the GOP has pretty much nothing to show on the health care front, either in terms of legislation, or a plan more ambitious than "Kill Obamacare". The healthcare cost problem is one of the top issues (maybe THE top issue) for voters in 2020, and Democrats have real, substantial proposals. What's the Trump response? I'm guessing it's this.

ilikehurdles 7y ago

Outside of funding for the ministry of war, Mitch McConnell will not allow a vote or (when possible) even debate on anything the democratic sides of Congress support, and any bill of this nature would have been supported by both parties.

SlowRobotAhead 7y ago

Excuse me for being a little cynical... But I find the timing a little convenient that only after 2016 are people concerned about Executive Orders and presidential overreach. I'm sure this comment will be followed up with someone saying "nah I've been concerned" and that may be true, but let's look at the common mode here. It's like the people arguing for bigger government are many of the same people arguing against government when it's someone they don't like in power and can't see past their own noses on this.

dclowd9901 7y ago
Oh good, a whataboutism. Not enough of those, lately. I'm not everyone, and it is something that's of deep concern to me, as it should be to you. So feel free to shelve your cynicism and join me in asking our representatives to do better.
- SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
  A whataboutism would be if the topics weren't directly related. How is this that? Let me help you out. A "whataboutism" would be if I made a post saying "Well, Trump did this one good thing, but Obama passed Credit Card Reforms!" See how those are non-sequitur?

beat 7y ago

Well, why was it drafted? For the good of consumers? Or as part of a re-election campaign, a promise to "do something" in the face of the hard reality that the GOP has pretty much nothing to show on the health care front, either in terms of legislation, or a plan more ambitious than "Kill Obamacare". The healthcare cost problem is one of the top issues (maybe THE top issue) for voters in 2020, and Democrats have real, substantial proposals. What's the Trump response? I'm guessing it's this.