The Rein-in Bill

Foxfyre

Eternal optimist
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 11, 2007
67,482
32,903
2,330
Desert Southwest USA
Even some responsible Democrats are joining with Republicans in a 'rein-in' bill that would prevent Biden from making executive orders that would cost taxpayers $1 billion or more until studies of how that would affect inflation are done and reported.

Why $1 billion? Why not $1 million or $1 thousand? The Constitution does not give the President authority to decide where money is spent on his own.

For that matter, why should regulatory agencies be able to pass rules and regulations that cost the people millions or billions without congressional approval? How is faceless bureaucrats imposing heavy costs on the public via regulation not akin to taxation without representation?

It is time that Congress relearns where that money comes from, who pays it, and the short and long term consequences of spending it.

The 'Rein-in Bill' is a good start.
 
This is an antiwar movement in its infancy, that needs to be disguised for the sake of the American people who have signed on to the war against Russia.

Some must have noticed how Ms. Maddow went to extremes with lies on trying to defuse the antiwar protests?
 
Half ass bullshit.
Why dont they make a bill that reins in the power of the Prez so EOs can be used like it was meant to be in the first place? They are supposed to be used to name parks, direct govt agencies to carry out legislated tasks etc.
But hey, lets take what we can get and cheer on those pieces of worthless shit for giving us crumbs 💩
 
Dozens of Dems join Reps to bitch slap Biden.
The Dems can safely sign on to this because it's a motherhood issue, and it doesn't need any acknowledgment that it hogties Biden from sending billions to the Ukraine.

The Dems' Whip must put this in perspective for how it will harm the war effort.
 
This is an antiwar movement in its infancy, that needs to be disguised for the sake of the American people who have signed on to the war against Russia.

Some must have noticed how Ms. Maddow went to extremes with lies on trying to defuse the antiwar protests?
What?
Well, thanks for your opinion.....I guess.
 
Half ass bullshit.
Why dont they make a bill that reins in the power of the Prez so EOs can be used like it was meant to be in the first place? They are supposed to be used to name parks, direct govt agencies to carry out legislated tasks etc.
But hey, lets take what we can get and cheer on those pieces of worthless shit for giving us crumbs 💩
It's a gifthorse, not crumbs but really the whole cake!
 
Dozens of Dems join Reps to bitch slap Biden.
I prefer to describe it as fiscal integrity and Congress doing its job for a change.

I do agree with others that Presidential EOs were intended for internal government policy and for more ceremonial purposes and stretches constitutionality when they involve the tax payer's money.
 
The Dems can safely sign on to this because it's a motherhood issue, and it doesn't need any acknowledgment that it hogties Biden from sending billions to the Ukraine.

The Dems' Whip must put this in perspective for how it will harm the war effort.
Ukraine is just the tip of an iceberg. There is a whole lot more than the Ukraine.
 
so in other words it will not make it through Congress
Hope springs eternal.

Again the bill is a good start but in reality is just putting a band-aid on one aspect of the problem. We need a complete overhaul of what the President, regulatory agencies, even Congress can and cannot do re the people's money.
 
so in other words it will not make it through Congress
Right! The system is built to ensure that a president's war can't be interfered with and be defused. There can't be enough Dems to make it veto proof.

But then there's popular opinion that has been known in the past to trump a president and the Constitution.

And what's the risk now that both sides are prepared to use the bombs if the situation deteriorates to the break point?
 
Hope springs eternal.

Again the bill is a good start but in reality is just putting a band-aid on one aspect of the problem. We need a complete overhaul of what the President, regulatory agencies, even Congress can and cannot do re the people's money.

You have more hope than I do. I see this as an empty gesture to go "well, we tried" and then everyone will vote for them again.
 
Right! The system is built to ensure that a president's war can't be interfered with and be defused. There can't be enough Dems to make it veto proof.

But then there's popular opinion that has been known in the past to trump a president and the Constitution.

And what's the risk now that both sides are prepared to use the bombs if the situation deteriorates to the break point?

There is a reason the AUMF for the Iraq War is still in effect and still being used by every POTUS since Bush II
 
Hope springs eternal.

Again the bill is a good start but in reality is just putting a band-aid on one aspect of the problem. We need a complete overhaul of what the President, regulatory agencies, even Congress can and cannot do re the people's money.
Just keep all discussion clear of any mention on how this could be destructive of the war's progress. All the other side benefits you allude to will be impossible to achieve without that first.

And for Dog's sake, don't mention it to the Dems. They can't support it if it's stuffed right in their face on the disastrous effect on Biden's war.
 
There is a reason the AUMF for the Iraq War is still in effect and still being used by every POTUS since Bush II
Yes, but this is a threat that's being introduced through the back door. And there 'is' the Vietnam experience!

Take it slow, we can hear some wheels turning and some gears grinding!
 

Forum List

Back
Top