Kingdom Come.

Congress no longer passes laws, it merely enacts broad policies. Contrary to the dictates of our Constitution vesting law-making authority in Congress, most of our laws are now established in the form of rules created by unelected bureaucrats within the ever-growing array of agencies under the control of the President. This evolving practice of “leaving the details” to administration agencies is unconstitutional because it shifts the balance of power of our tripartite system from co-equal branches to executive dominance.

How very sad that the accelerating practice should be fully acquiesced in by Congress itself, so busy running for office that it cannot be bothered with the hard work or the political risk of hammering out the details of the legal policies it passes. As Speaker Pelowsi so revealingly stated regarding Obama Care: “We have to pass the law in order to know what is in it.”

If, as is often argued in support of current practice, matters have become so complicated that detailed lawmaking is no longer feasible for Congress and must be delegated to others, then the Constitution requires those delegated be answerable to Congress, not the President. Following passage of “policy laws”, congressional employees should be tasked to promulgate rules consistent with the new policies and, when completed, submit them to Congress for final review, debate, and enactment.

President Obama, who was very fond of referring to President Bush as ‘King George’, is exercising unprecedented power through agency rule-making. Those who favor his actions on the merits should realize that rigid adherence to constitutional separation of powers is more important than situational goals, no matter how laudable they may be. Expansions of executive power granted to Mr Obama will be difficult, if not impossible, to deny to his successors.

In the final analysis, Americanism is not about being liberal or conservative but about preserving individual liberty through constitutional fealty.




This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Kingdom Come.

  1. Limida Facalon says:

    What the ex-Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (not Pelowsi –”low”, ha-ha) actually said was: “But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.” An improvement on an admittedly flawed statement, but the quote you provide is taken out of context, slighting Rep. Pelosi’s rhetorical eloquence.
    And after an extensive internet search, I’ve yet to find a single entry of President Obama referring to President Bush as “King George”. Fondly or otherwise.
    But the gist of your column, as I understand it, is to complain about bureaucrats or “agencies under the control of the President.” Oooh…our Prez has agents to do his bidding because the legislative branch “can’t be bothered with hard work…of the legal policies it passes.” Current Speaker Boehner best be getting bothered, right? Right. So we’re in agreement. (!?) I too want accountability, people we can vote out of office, not agents or lobbyists or bureaucrats legislating.
    Lastly, could you provide further info re: the Obama/King George quote? I’d be interested to know in where in the heck he said that!

    • Mike says:

      You’ve noticed that lately people are believing what they want to believe rather than pursuing the truth. Can you believe that a New York Times/CBS News Poll released prior to the president’s release of his long-form birth certificate found that 57% of adults surveyed nationwide thought Mr. Obama was born in the United States? I was going to respond to the May 4 blog by saying that your readers perhaps agree with what you write because they want to, but meanwhile you should be held to accuracy in quotes and reports. I see I was not the first to make the following points. At the expense of redundancy, please consider the difference between your misquote (“We have to pass the law in order to know what is in it.”) and what Pelosi actually said: “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.” One may consider what she said misguided, but she at least deserves accuracy within quotation marks.
      I have not heard Obama refer to Bush as “King George” and Googled the heck out of it looking for evidence of such. Indeed, Russ Feingold, a WI liberal no longer in office, used the term in describing George W. during some wiretapping and Afghanistan incidents, but if you cannot directly pull those words from Obama, credibility is weakened and your important point may more easily be dismissed. We still agree that truth should guide our thinking.

      • Avatar of thesetruths thesetruths says:

        Good points all. I should have checked attribution and accuracy more carefully. Indeed, as I reread the blog, the asides referred to were both unnecessary and distracting. Now, on to the discussion on the issue: Are we permitting an unconstitutional shift of lawmaking authority to the executive? Will citizen sovereigns not lose both authority and liberty if unelected persons pass laws in more dimml lit surroundings? Is my suggestion that rule makers be legislative employees rather than executive employees effective?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>