Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    Obama has managed this whole health care thing much like he has managed his second term thus far...badly. I think businesses have had plenty of time to plan for and implement the changes the law requires. Giving them more time make Obama appear weak...again.

    " Above all..be the heroine in your life..not the victim" Nora Ephron

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Jack....you should stick to the WCVB forum, you had more frIends there. Oh, wait those weren't friends....they were your multiple personalities....wink, wink. 

     

     

     

     



    Quoted.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    MO & miscricket,

     

    Thanks. "Where is the decency?" someone famously said. 

    What would he have me do when I am caring for someone 24/7?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Whoa..hang on kemosahbee....don't thank me for anything. I am not involved in this fracus and have no desire to be. Please do not involve me in it. Thank you.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

     

     

    MO & miscricket,

     

     

    Thanks. "Where is the decency?" someone famously said. 

    What would he have me do when I am caring for someone 24/7?

     

     

     

     




    Whoa..hang on kemosahbee....don't thank me for anything. I am not involved in this fracus and have no desire to be. Please do not involve me in it. Thank you.

     

     

     

     



    kemosahbee.....LMAO..... I was wondering how you ended up in the quote? 

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I have no idea...lol. Somehow Trouble seems to find me on these boards even when I'm not looking for it. Haha..in life.. "hang on Kemosahbee" is a phrase I use a lot...especially when someone says something that I find ridiculous...and I feel the need to set them straight..or when dealing with someone who has an agenda..lol

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to jackbu's comment:

     


    andie:

    I just think it is funny that when others take a break from this site, you accuse them of being banned.  I noticed that you took a few months off and it wasn't a gradual return but a full day of blogging return.  I see you still like to incorporate your personal life into your blogs. Sad way to get attention.

    I see the person who posts 20 year old pictures still follows my blogs.  Those names of which you refer to on channel 5 have a combined existence of 6 years on that site and less than 75 posts.  Not a lot of talking going on.  You have to do better then that.

     

     



    I do not have to do anything jack. 

     

    Why you are so interested in me is a mystery but my life is none of your business.

    Posters know some of my current life because I shared it in the "failure on the war on weed " thread. 

    Medicinal maijuana was the focus of my posts. 

    I took a VOLUNTARY break from posting for 4 months. You are not man enough to admit you were suspended. You and I know you were. You can check with BDC. Be my guest. I was not suspended during my vacatoion.

    Does not look like you learned anything from your suspension.

    Take a lesson from Bill-806 in the Red Sox forums. He had the guts to deal with BDC directly, got re-instated, and his new motto is "RESPECT".

    I can post all I want as I care for my husband. Just hope if cancer hits you have the guts to take the treatments and at least one person in your life to take care of you.

    You are not pushing my buttons, jack. If you were than I might wish cancer would  find you...and I do not. Never will. 

    Sad person here jack is the one in the mirror.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

     

     

    MO & miscricket,

     

     

    Thanks. "Where is the decency?" someone famously said. 

    What would he have me do when I am caring for someone 24/7?

     

     

     

     




    Whoa..hang on kemosahbee....don't thank me for anything. I am not involved in this fracus and have no desire to be. Please do not involve me in it. Thank you.

     

     

     

     



    kemosahbee.....LMAO..... I was wondering how you ended up in the quote? 

     

     

     

     




    I have no idea...lol. Somehow Trouble seems to find me on these boards even when I'm not looking for it. Haha..in life.. "hang on Kemosahbee" is a phrase I use a lot...especially when someone says something that I find ridiculous...and I feel the need to set them straight..or when dealing with someone who has an agenda..lol

     

    [/QUOTE]

    miscricket,

    So sorry. Was an honest mistake. Just got back on BDC and noticed your posts among other things.

    Think I was a little over tired and "squished" you and MO together, for lack of a better word.

    All I can say is I am sorry. I apoligize. Will be more careful in future...esp. when I know I am running on empty. (Althouigh I do not always know when I am running on empty as is apparent in this case.)

    Hope we are good.

    andie

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

    MO & miscricket,

    Thanks. "Where is the decency?" someone famously said. 

    What would he have me do when I am caring for someone 24/7?

     

     

     

    Jack likes to make the rules.  I think it gives him some sort of power trip. Go figure.

     

     



    MO,

    I have been told this before...about the rule thing. 

    As for "Go figure"...I really cannot quite wrap my head around it.

    Seems so simple to me. We are posting on Boston.com. They are the only ones empowered to make the rules. Even the 1st Amendment does not apply here.

    We are not posting on Jack/John.com.

    Even the poster we acquired in February, our teenage double IQ internet tough guy  I believe understands that much. And as one poster said, he has been "slapped silly" all over the forums.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    I'm sure it has nothing to do with the the number of waivers he has granted in the last year alone is in the deep THOUSANDS.  By 2014 the only ones left would be Microsoft and Walmart,  How "comprehensive".



    Obamacare can't be implemented as written.  Obama is making it up as he goes along, which is unconstitutional.

    Obamacare is failing to deliver on it's promises of bending the cost curve down, and instead, is bending the cost curve up.

    The libruls claim all sorts of good things will come out of Obamacare, but somehow lack the ability to implement it, waiver their union and politically connected friends, and somehow think that they can create a market out of thin air.  Most would call that an apprtoach untethered to reality.

    My conclusion is that, regardless of whether you think socialized medicine is a good idea, or a bad idea, it is not working.  No one of sound mind should support something that is simply not working.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

     

     

    MO & miscricket,

     

     

    Thanks. "Where is the decency?" someone famously said. 

    What would he have me do when I am caring for someone 24/7?

     

     

     

     




    Whoa..hang on kemosahbee....don't thank me for anything. I am not involved in this fracus and have no desire to be. Please do not involve me in it. Thank you.

     

     

     

     



    kemosahbee.....LMAO..... I was wondering how you ended up in the quote? 

     

     

     

     




    I have no idea...lol. Somehow Trouble seems to find me on these boards even when I'm not looking for it. Haha..in life.. "hang on Kemosahbee" is a phrase I use a lot...especially when someone says something that I find ridiculous...and I feel the need to set them straight..or when dealing with someone who has an agenda..lol

     



    miscricket,

    So sorry. Was an honest mistake. Just got back on BDC and noticed your posts among other things.

    Think I was a little over tired and "squished" you and MO together, for lack of a better word.

    All I can say is I am sorry. I apoligize. Will be more careful in future...esp. when I know I am running on empty. (Althouigh I do not always know when I am running on empty as is apparent in this case.)

    Hope we are good.

    andie

    [/QUOTE]


    No worries Andiejen...

    I learned my lesson a couple of years ago about posting and exchanging e-mails when I was "running on empty"...something I thought was an escape from the stress and pain of watching someone I loved deeply slowly drift towards death turned out to be just another source of stress that I didn't need.

    I learn from everything though..and I learned that rather than trying to escape from pain and anguish..turning to the people who matter in your life and letting them be there for you is better in the long run.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to andiejen's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

     

     

    MO & miscricket,

     

     

    Thanks. "Where is the decency?" someone famously said. 

    What would he have me do when I am caring for someone 24/7?

     

     

     

     




    Whoa..hang on kemosahbee....don't thank me for anything. I am not involved in this fracus and have no desire to be. Please do not involve me in it. Thank you.

     

     

     

     



    kemosahbee.....LMAO..... I was wondering how you ended up in the quote? 

     

     

     

     




    I have no idea...lol. Somehow Trouble seems to find me on these boards even when I'm not looking for it. Haha..in life.. "hang on Kemosahbee" is a phrase I use a lot...especially when someone says something that I find ridiculous...and I feel the need to set them straight..or when dealing with someone who has an agenda..lol

     

     

     



    miscricket,

     

     

    So sorry. Was an honest mistake. Just got back on BDC and noticed your posts among other things.

    Think I was a little over tired and "squished" you and MO together, for lack of a better word.

    All I can say is I am sorry. I apoligize. Will be more careful in future...esp. when I know I am running on empty. (Althouigh I do not always know when I am running on empty as is apparent in this case.)

    Hope we are good.

    andie

     




    No worries Andiejen...

     

    I learned my lesson a couple of years ago about posting and exchanging e-mails when I was "running on empty"...something I thought was an escape from the stress and pain of watching someone I loved deeply slowly drift towards death turned out to be just another source of stress that I didn't need.

    I learn from everything though..and I learned that rather than trying to escape from pain and anguish..turning to the people who matter in your life and letting them be there for you is better in the long run.

    [/QUOTE]

    miscricket,

    I am glad we are good. Thank you.

    I do have supportive people in my "real" life. This has been going on for some time. 

    My loved one chooses not to have anyone in our home during this period. His condition so his choice.

    I have done it both ways. I have stepped totally away from BDC, as well as other activities. Then I started posting again. 

    I really do not want to drain my loved ones no matter what they say.

    No playbook for this. 

    Best I can do is learn from this...not just at the end...whatever that is going to be...but as I go I think.

    And when I mess up, say I am sorry and hope I am forgiven.

     

    andie

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to ms_obstinate's comment:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    No worries Andiejen...

    I learned my lesson a couple of years ago about posting and exchanging e-mails when I was "running on empty"...something I thought was an escape from the stress and pain of watching someone I loved deeply slowly drift towards death turned out to be just another source of stress that I didn't need.

    I learn from everything though..and I learned that rather than trying to escape from pain and anguish..turning to the people who matter in your life and letting them be there for you is better in the long run.

     




     

    I have to agree with miscricket on this one, similiar scenario when my dad was fighting his battle with cancer I thought an escape would be chatting with strangers and basically running away from the reality of what was happening. BIG MISTAKE!

    Emotions took over many of those days and I found myself in unnessessary battles.

    Don't make the same mistake andie. Step away again. We will know your real reason for taking a break, not some made up one (your being banned) from some troll that prays on people at their weakest. (Not placing full blame on the troll, I take responsibility for my actions at the time).

    Please take my advice, spend less time here and more time with your husband...or doing something that makes you happy.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    MO,

    I hear you. 

    Perhaps a balance of not posting and posting as much as I have. Not because someone else commented on it but because you are sharing your experience when you were in a very similar time of your life.

    Have to remember what does make me happy that does not involve the person in question. 

    Sounds corny I know though there are a few things where we do diverge in interests. :)

    I thank you for the advice.

    andie

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    WASHINGTON — In a significant setback for President Barack Obama’s signature domestic initiative, the administration on Tuesday abruptly announced a one-year delay, until 2015, in his health-care law’s mandate that larger employers provide coverage for their workers or pay penalties. The decision postpones the effective date beyond next year’s midterm elections.

    Employer groups welcomed the news of the concession, which followed complaints from businesses and was posted late in the day on the White House and Treasury websites while the president was flying home from Africa. Republicans’ gleeful reactions made clear that they would not cease to make repeal of Obamacare a campaign issue for the third straight election cycle. 

      Thoughts?



    Not sure it's even within his power to decide not to enforce a law or delay enforcement.

    President Obama's decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government.

    Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323823004578591503509555268.html

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    Lot of name calling post . Johnny did it !   I think we need a time out.

     

    My Dianostic center just billed me , double the cost of the same test as last year. $423 vs $836.

    yea!  Obamacare

    Politics is a Game now . All about themselves

    White House like a carnival . They are Just having fun.

    B.S. is the name of the game



    chiefhowie,

    Is this not under the category of health care, not health insurance?

    Why did the cost of that particular test double in just one year? That test comes under the category of something your MD ordered so he/she could care for you properly. That is health care. 

    Just as I have a mamogram yearly. The cost is X for those digital x-rays as well as the cost for a radiologist to read them. If there is a problem, I am referred to breast specialist to look into it further. All of this is health care, not health insurance.

    Obamacare addresses health insurance...not health care. The spiraling costs of some health care tests, procedures, etc., is another issue which the U.S. needs to address.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    WASHINGTON — In a significant setback for President Barack Obama’s signature domestic initiative, the administration on Tuesday abruptly announced a one-year delay, until 2015, in his health-care law’s mandate that larger employers provide coverage for their workers or pay penalties. The decision postpones the effective date beyond next year’s midterm elections.

    Employer groups welcomed the news of the concession, which followed complaints from businesses and was posted late in the day on the White House and Treasury websites while the president was flying home from Africa. Republicans’ gleeful reactions made clear that they would not cease to make repeal of Obamacare a campaign issue for the third straight election cycle. 

      Thoughts?

     



    Not sure it's even within his power to decide not to enforce a law or delay enforcement.

     

    President Obama's decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government.

    Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323823004578591503509555268.html

    [/QUOTE]

    tvoter,

    I read the WSJ article you cited in your post. The author does make some compelling points about the delay of the health mandate for employers and the possible overall constitutional consequences.

    I found a couple of paragraphs in the middle very interesting. They comment on both the Republican and Democrat response to the thread topic.

     

    Republican opponents of ObamaCare might say that the suspension of the employer mandate is such good policy that there's no need to worry about constitutionality. But if the president can dispense with laws, and parts of laws, when he disagrees with them, the implications for constitutional government are dire.

    Democrats too may acquiesce in Mr. Obama's action, as they have his other aggressive assertions of executive power. Yet what will they say when a Republican president decides that the tax rate on capital gains is a drag on economic growth and instructs the IRS not to enforce it?

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Lot of name calling post . Johnny did it !   I think we need a time out.

     

    My Dianostic center just billed me , double the cost of the same test as last year. $423 vs $836.

    yea!  Obamacare

    Politics is a Game now . All about themselves

    White House like a carnival . They are Just having fun.

    B.S. is the name of the game

     

     



    chiefhowie,

     

     

    Is this not under the category of health care, not health insurance?

    Why did the cost of that particular test double in just one year? That test comes under the category of something your MD ordered so he/she could care for you properly. That is health care. 

    Just as I have a mamogram yearly. The cost is X for those digital x-rays as well as the cost for a radiologist to read them. If there is a problem, I am referred to breast specialist to look into it further. All of this is health care, not health insurance.

    Obamacare addresses health insurance...not health care. The spiraling costs of some health care tests, procedures, etc., is another issue which the U.S. needs to address.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Sorry I disagree

     

    The Test were same annual test for me , type 2 dia, ect. > tricare

    They charge because they can !   > make money.

    Just like a bag of fruit I bought $7.95 last week, 5 years ago .98 cents.

    Wally's prices in general up %40

    Student loans ect.

    once the train is on the track , hard to reverse. 

    We are a credit Card nation now. Worst than the housing boom.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    chiefhowie,

    I too am not immune. I/my household also has its fair share of medical care necessary on a regular basis as well as stuff that happens, like broken legs, blood clots, cancer, etc.

    I do not know what the answer is. For sure any solution is not going to make everyone happy campers.

    For example...price controls. Capping price increases on tests such as your annual type 2 test and my annual mammogram. 

    How do you think that would fly? With us as health care consumers probably just fine in general. With the providers, etc., not so fine. 

    One of the overall concepts behind Obamacare is to get everyone covered covered with health insurance. One thing that is supposed to do is help prevent small health problems from becoming major, expensive health problems that we with insurance end up paying for.

    So not even a humanitarian argument but a practical argument.

    Also, as you know, diabetes is not a condition to be treated in the E.R. It needs a M.D. It is also on the rise in the U.S. Left untreated it has several dire consequences including blindness and amputation. Yet many people are running around undiagnosed and untreated.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to chiefhowie's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Lot of name calling post . Johnny did it !   I think we need a time out.

     

    My Dianostic center just billed me , double the cost of the same test as last year. $423 vs $836.

    yea!  Obamacare

    Politics is a Game now . All about themselves

    White House like a carnival . They are Just having fun.

    B.S. is the name of the game

     

     



    chiefhowie,

     

     

    Is this not under the category of health care, not health insurance?

    Why did the cost of that particular test double in just one year? That test comes under the category of something your MD ordered so he/she could care for you properly. That is health care. 

    Just as I have a mamogram yearly. The cost is X for those digital x-rays as well as the cost for a radiologist to read them. If there is a problem, I am referred to breast specialist to look into it further. All of this is health care, not health insurance.

    Obamacare addresses health insurance...not health care. The spiraling costs of some health care tests, procedures, etc., is another issue which the U.S. needs to address.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Sorry I disagree

     

    The Test were same annual test for me , type 2 dia, ect. > tricare

    They charge because they can !   > make money.

    Just like a bag of fruit I bought $7.95 last week, 5 years ago .98 cents.

    Wally's prices in general up %40

    Student loans ect.

    once the train is on the track , hard to reverse. 

    We are a credit Card nation now. Worst than the housing boom.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    chiefhowie,

    I am sorry. I was remiss yesterday in not telling you I am so sorry you have to live with type II diabetes. 

    I do not have that condition, but I do know quite a bit about it, including what people who have have to do on a daily basis to monitor it as well as control it. I have had, and do have, people in my life with this condition.

    I also know there are a subset of people who blame people who develop this condition on the person. If that has/does happen to you my suggestion is to tell them to go pound sand...or words to that effect.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to andiejen's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    WASHINGTON — In a significant setback for President Barack Obama’s signature domestic initiative, the administration on Tuesday abruptly announced a one-year delay, until 2015, in his health-care law’s mandate that larger employers provide coverage for their workers or pay penalties. The decision postpones the effective date beyond next year’s midterm elections.

    Employer groups welcomed the news of the concession, which followed complaints from businesses and was posted late in the day on the White House and Treasury websites while the president was flying home from Africa. Republicans’ gleeful reactions made clear that they would not cease to make repeal of Obamacare a campaign issue for the third straight election cycle. 

      Thoughts?

     

     



    Not sure it's even within his power to decide not to enforce a law or delay enforcement.

     

     

    President Obama's decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government.

    Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323823004578591503509555268.html

     

    [/QUOTE]

    tvoter,

     

    I read the WSJ article you cited in your post. The author does make some compelling points about the delay of the health mandate for employers and the possible overall constitutional consequences.

    I found a couple of paragraphs in the middle very interesting. They comment on both the Republican and Democrat response to the thread topic.

     

    Republican opponents of ObamaCare might say that the suspension of the employer mandate is such good policy that there's no need to worry about constitutionality. But if the president can dispense with laws, and parts of laws, when he disagrees with them, the implications for constitutional government are dire.

     

    Democrats too may acquiesce in Mr. Obama's action, as they have his other aggressive assertions of executive power. Yet what will they say when a Republican president decides that the tax rate on capital gains is a drag on economic growth and instructs the IRS not to enforce it?

    [/QUOTE]

    No president has the power to change the law.  Per the constitution, their task is to execute the law.

    Who ever wrote this article is wrong.  picking and choosing which laws to enforce/change is not an executive power, and to suggest ignoring it in this case is ok becasuethey like the result is setting a dangerous standard.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to tvoter's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to andiejen's comment:

     

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

    WASHINGTON — In a significant setback for President Barack Obama’s signature domestic initiative, the administration on Tuesday abruptly announced a one-year delay, until 2015, in his health-care law’s mandate that larger employers provide coverage for their workers or pay penalties. The decision postpones the effective date beyond next year’s midterm elections.

    Employer groups welcomed the news of the concession, which followed complaints from businesses and was posted late in the day on the White House and Treasury websites while the president was flying home from Africa. Republicans’ gleeful reactions made clear that they would not cease to make repeal of Obamacare a campaign issue for the third straight election cycle. 

      Thoughts?

     

     

     



    Not sure it's even within his power to decide not to enforce a law or delay enforcement.

     

     

     

    President Obama's decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government.

    Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323823004578591503509555268.html

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    tvoter,

     

     

    I read the WSJ article you cited in your post. The author does make some compelling points about the delay of the health mandate for employers and the possible overall constitutional consequences.

    I found a couple of paragraphs in the middle very interesting. They comment on both the Republican and Democrat response to the thread topic.

     

    Republican opponents of ObamaCare might say that the suspension of the employer mandate is such good policy that there's no need to worry about constitutionality. But if the president can dispense with laws, and parts of laws, when he disagrees with them, the implications for constitutional government are dire.

     

    Democrats too may acquiesce in Mr. Obama's action, as they have his other aggressive assertions of executive power. Yet what will they say when a Republican president decides that the tax rate on capital gains is a drag on economic growth and instructs the IRS not to enforce it?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No president has the power to change the law.  Per the constitution, their task is to execute the law.

     

    Who ever wrote this article is wrong.  picking and choosing which laws to enforce/change is not an executive power, and to suggest ignoring it in this case is ok becasuethey like the result is setting a dangerous standard.

    [/QUOTE]

    skeeter,

    That is the point of the article. I pulled out those two paragraphs on the health mandate being delayed as examples of, in this case, both Democrats and Republicans in general  not minding the delay. However it does set a dangerous precedent.

    The WSJ article was written by a former U.S. Federal Judge.

    He also cites other examples where he feels the same thing has occurred. I did not pull them out in my post since I was trying to keep the focus on the thread topic.

    Could copy and paste the whole article but think if posters are interested they will go to URL and read it for themselves.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    Gregin,

    Here is the entire article cited by tvoter from the WSJ.

    According to the author, the president has substantial discretion about how to enforce a law but not whether to enforce a law.

    According to the author, the Obama administration has yet to offer a legal justification for the delay in implementing the health care mandate for employers.

      By 
    • MICHAEL W. MCCONNELL

    President Obama's decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government.

    Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

    This matter—the limits of executive power—has deep historical roots. During the period of royal absolutism, English monarchs asserted a right to dispense with parliamentary statutes they disliked. King James II's use of the prerogative was a key grievance that lead to the Glorious Revolution of 1688. The very first provision of the English Bill of Rights of 1689—the most important precursor to the U.S. Constitution—declared that "the pretended power of suspending of laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, without consent of parliament, is illegal."

    To make sure that American presidents could not resurrect a similar prerogative, the Framers of the Constitution made the faithful enforcement of the law a constitutional duty.

    The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which advises the president on legal and constitutional issues, has repeatedly opined that the president may decline to enforce laws he believes are unconstitutional. But these opinions have always insisted that the president has no authority, as one such memo put it in 1990, to "refuse to enforce a statute he opposes for policy reasons."

    Attorneys general under Presidents Carter, Reagan, both Bushes and Clinton all agreed on this point. With the exception of Richard Nixon, whose refusals to spend money appropriated by Congress were struck down by the courts, no prior president has claimed the power to negate a law that is concededly constitutional.

    In 1998, the Supreme Court struck down a congressional grant of line-item veto authority to the president to cancel spending items in appropriations. The reason? The only constitutional power the president has to suspend or repeal statutes is to veto a bill or propose new legislation. Writing for the court in Clinton v. City of New York, Justice John Paul Stevens noted: "There is no provision in the Constitution that authorizes the president to enact, to amend, or to repeal statutes."

    The employer mandate in the Affordable Care Act contains no provision allowing the president to suspend, delay or repeal it. Section 1513(d) states in no uncertain terms that "The amendments made by this section shall apply to months beginning after December 31, 2013." Imagine the outcry if Mitt Romney had been elected president and simply refused to enforce the whole of ObamaCare.

    This is not the first time Mr. Obama has suspended the operation of statutes by executive decree, but it is the most barefaced. In June of last year, for example, the administration stopped initiating deportation proceedings against some 800,000 illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. before age 16, lived here at least five years, and met a variety of other criteria. This was after Congress refused to enact the Dream Act, which would have allowed these individuals to stay in accordance with these conditions. Earlier in 2012, the president effectively replaced congressional requirements governing state compliance under the No Child Left Behind Act with new ones crafted by his administration.

    The president defended his suspension of the immigration laws as an exercise of prosecutorial discretion. He defended his amending of No Child Left Behind as an exercise of authority in the statute to waive certain requirements. The administration has yet to offer a legal justification for last week's suspension of the employer mandate.

    Republican opponents of ObamaCare might say that the suspension of the employer mandate is such good policy that there's no need to worry about constitutionality. But if the president can dispense with laws, and parts of laws, when he disagrees with them, the implications for constitutional government are dire.

    Democrats too may acquiesce in Mr. Obama's action, as they have his other aggressive assertions of executive power. Yet what will they say when a Republican president decides that the tax rate on capital gains is a drag on economic growth and instructs the IRS not to enforce it?

    And what of immigration reform? Why bother debating the details of a compromise if future presidents will feel free to disregard those parts of the statute that they don't like?

    The courts cannot be counted on to intervene in cases like this. As the Supreme Court recently held in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the same-sex marriage case involving California's Proposition 8, private citizens do not have standing in court to challenge the executive's refusal to enforce laws, unless they have a personal stake in the matter. If a president declines to enforce tax laws, immigration laws, or restrictions on spending—to name a few plausible examples—it is very likely that no one will have standing to sue.

    Of all the stretches of executive power Americans have seen in the past few years, the president's unilateral suspension of statutes may have the most disturbing long-term effects. As the Supreme Court said long ago (Kendall v. United States, 1838), allowing the president to refuse to enforce statutes passed by Congress "would be clothing the president with a power to control the legislation of congress, and paralyze the administration of justice."                                                     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Health Mandate Delayed for Employers

    Clearly there is a misunderstandpastas to the Presidential flexibility here. What Obama is doing is NOT enforcing the law, he is deferring the law. That is not allowed under sec 2 art 3 of the constitution.

    if he wants to defer something, that is not enforcing the law.  The proper path is back to the houses for a law that defers the issue.

    but, don't expect the houses to do so, and don't expect a challenge.  Even if there was a challenge, don't expect SCOTUS to do anything other than to find away to allow Obama to do this.  

    Our method of government is teetering.

     

Share