Home » Trump, defender of the Constitution re Obamacare

Comments

Trump, defender of the Constitution re Obamacare — 13 Comments

  1. I have believed for some time that the way to get rid of Obamacare and its market distorting features is to make it optional. The only people happy with Obamacare are the Medicaid recipients which had its income limits loosened. Fine, let them have Medicaid and let everyone else, 85% of the population before 2008, have a choice of insurance vs HSAs and cash for routine care. Then, block grant Medicaid to the states. The governors and the people of each state can then decide how much blood and treasure to hand over to the non-productive of the state.

  2. Socialists are in their bait-and-switch game again. First, they mandate unworkable economic plan and then, when it fails, blame somebody else for its failure. Bolsheviks did that by imposing price-fixing for essential foods well below market price, and when suppliers went out of business to avoid losses, blamed “profiteers” for famine resulting from their own actions. Maduro in Venezuela did the same. And now Democrats blame Trump for inevitable collapse of ACA built into this law legislated by them only.

  3. It says something about Obama that Trump has to issue an EO to correct his illegal and unconstitutional actions.

  4. That’s a good point Neo. I saw David French’s article. As it’s pretty clear, I’m a big non-fan of governing by EO. Maybe even a little knee-jerk about it. But I can understand the argument for the EO in this case.

    One reason I’m against EOs is that we get into this bull in a china shop thrashing back and forth as administrations change. Sweeping changes one way, then the other, and American citizens caught in the flying crockery.

    We’ll see the results of this. Trump’s pretty good at propaganda so he may be able to continue to tie what’s about to happen to Obama, but if things really spiral out of control the tag “TrumpCare” may stick.

    (clears throat) – “We’ll see”

    On the bright side, we can all say “Merry Christmas!” again! Our long national nightmare is over! 🙂

  5. Not by coincidence?

    http://neoneocon.com/2017/10/14/literary-leftists-bertrand-russell-on-the-bolsheviks

    Betrand Russell was a socialist, but he wasn’t impressed by the Communists:

    “I am compelled to reject Bolshevism for two reasons: First, because the price mankind must pay to achieve Communism by Bolshevik methods is too terrible; and secondly because, even after paying the price, I do not believe the result would be what the Bolsheviks profess to desire.”
    * * *
    Substitute your choice of ideological fudge-words (socialism, progressivism) for Bolshevism; and your choice of any Leftist agenda item (Obamacare in this case) for Communism.
    * * *
    Sergey Says:
    October 14th, 2017 at 1:19 pm
    Socialists are in their bait-and-switch game again. First, they mandate unworkable economic plan and then, when it fails, blame somebody else for its failure. Bolsheviks did that by imposing price-fixing for essential foods well below market price, and when suppliers went out of business to avoid losses, blamed “profiteers” for famine resulting from their own actions. Maduro in Venezuela did the same. And now Democrats blame Trump for inevitable collapse of ACA built into this law legislated by them only.

  6. Worth bumping this from yesterday’s post:
    http://neoneocon.com/2017/10/13/trump-untweaks-obamacare/#comments

    Irv Says:
    October 14th, 2017 at 2:24 pm
    One president uses his pen in a clearly unconstitutional manner (so said a federal court) to do things no congress would vote for.

    Another president uses his pen to stop the unconstitutional power grab of the previous president.

    People complain that they both are equally guilty of ruling by the pen. Welcome to Wonderland!
    * * *
    Irv, you know that only one party is entitled to make unconstitutional power grabs.

    Updated Ben Franklin (with the word “legal” to be taken seriously but not literally):

    “Power grabs are always legal in the first person — our power grabs. It is only in the third person — their power grabs — that they are illegal.”

    I’m also unpersuaded by the complaints that “Trump isn’t working with Congress” since he has now on several occasions “remanded” the issues, for which he has rolled back Obama’s illegal actions, to Congress for legislation.

    He isn’t supposed to write the laws, just to execute them. Expecting (and now forcing) Presidents to do the former is a usurpation that dates back to at least Teddy Roosevelt, if not further.

  7. Bloomberg isn’t happy, and seems to contradict McCarthy about the lawfulness of Trump’s move.
    Are the two of them talking about the same clause in the ACA, or is Bloomberg conflating the two fundings (one lawfully appropriated, and one unlawfully dispensed)?

    https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-13/a-staggering-blow-to-u-s-health-care

    “Just hours after announcing some new ways to destabilize the health-insurance markets created by the Affordable Care Act, on Thursday President Donald Trump delivered a direct blow to a crucial aspect of the law itself: No longer will the federal government reimburse insurance companies for reducing out-of-pocket costs for poorer customers, as the law requires them to do.”

    Here’s McCarthy, quoted above:
    “In cutting off the insurance-company subsidies, Trump is enforcing the ACA as written, consistent with his constitutional duty to execute the laws faithfully. It was President Obama who usurped Congress’s power of the purse by directing the payment of taxpayer funds that lawmakers had not appropriated.”

    I don’t know which is correct or if they are talking past each other, or if Bloomberg is flat-out lying.

  8. “He isn’t supposed to write the laws, just to execute them.”

    AMEN! My great hope for a long time has been for us to get a boring President who does just that.

    “Expecting (and now forcing) Presidents to do the former is a usurpation that dates back to at least Teddy Roosevelt, if not further.”

    I’m not expecting the President to write the laws. I do expect him to have an agenda and focus on getting that agenda enacted (and be good at doing so). What I’m saying is that we can’t pretend the President is not the leader of his party which controls all three branches, and I think it’s reasonable to acknowledge that his modus operandi of publicly insulting and undermining his own party members, of undermining the legislation itself (calling the House version of repeal/replace that he himself championed as “mean”, for one small example), being completely unable to bring along the senators on the fringe – in fact, actively antagonizing senators he needs, etc, has been counter-productive.

    You hired him to do things. You hated it when Obama did things through EOs. I realize there are good arguments to defend the current one, but Trump is not laying down a good track-record of pushing his agenda through legislative means. Even if Lou Dobbs thinks his is the most accomplished administration in modern history.

    Trump will possibly have a weakened caucus in 2018 if trends continue (especially since he’s actively planning, it seems, to primary members of his own party who haven’t been sufficiently docile). And I don’t really think he has a good grasp on how constitutional government works. So – my prediction, disagree if you’d like – is that we’re going to see Trump more and more “getting things done” through EOs. Basically a repeat of Obama but from the Nationalist/Populist/Trumpist side. That may result in things you like but the next time we get a leftist in office the precedent of ruling by executive fiat will be even more cemented.

  9. Here is my laugh line of the week (in bold).

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/10/speaking-of-sabotage.php

    On May 12, 2016, Hulse reported Judge Collyer’s decision finding the subsidy payments illegal in “Judge backs House challenge to key part of health law.” Hulse quoted the aptly named Obama White House spokesman Josh Earnest doing his Baghdad Bob routine:

    Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, dismissed the judge’s ruling as another instance when Republicans have sought to overturn the Affordable Care Act through the courts. He said the dispute should be settled by voters, not judges.
    * * *
    Seems to me they argued that a bit differently when the topic was same-sex marriage, and abortion in the distant past IIRC.

    If the courts had done their job in the beginning (looking at you, John Roberts), we wouldn’t now be “overturning the ACA” at all.

    BTW, Josh: it was settled by voters in both the MA election before Obamacare was rammed through (“I’ll be the vote against” Scott Brown won even there), and in the Presidential one just past.

  10. In the comment neo cites, Bill states, “If they won’t do it we can vote them out.”

    Here in this comment section, in response to “He isn’t supposed to write the laws, just to execute them.”

    Bill states, “AMEN! My great hope for a long time has been for us to get a boring President who does just that.”

    he then states, “I do expect him to have an agenda and focus on getting that agenda enacted (and be good at doing so). What I’m saying is that we can’t pretend the President is not the leader of his party which controls all three branches”

    Other than the Judiciary, a long term project, voting in a Republican majority has resulted in minimal changes. A Republican Pres. who merely executes the laws will result in a continuation of the status quo in which we march a bit slower toward the Collective. Demonstrated by Trump’s attempt at a travel ban approved by the Obama administration.

    The only agenda that the GOPe will approve is one that continues the status quo. Demonstrated by the Republican majority’s failure to repeal Obamacare.

    Finally, appointing more conservative judges does not equate to the Republican Party controlling the judiciary. Demonstrated in several instances by the activist leftist judge’s denial of Trump’s clearly constitutional actions.

  11. Finally, appointing more conservative judges does not equate to the Republican Party controlling the judiciary.

    Fair point GB.

  12. “Even if Lou Dobbs thinks his is the most accomplished administration in modern history.” – Bill

    Add me to that list. Now his is the most accomplished, at this point, largely because of the unprecedented move by the previous administration to pull the country to the left.

    Didn’t Obama himself say he was going to “fundamentally transform the country?”

    So, undoing the damage inflicted previously is somewhat of a low bar.

    And some/much of what is being undone is not requiring EOs, but merely re-writing regulations. And the fact that the details of legislation passed by Congress is subject to the whims of an administration is a fault lying at the feet of Congress.

    President Trump has done the Republican party a favor– by identifying that the party does not control a majority of the senate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>