Sunday, February 23, 2014
“What we’re seeing now is the usurpation of authority that’s unprecedented in this country … a system in which a single individual is allowed to rewrite legislation … is a system that borders on authoritarianism.”
Do we have a Congress or
a coffle of slaves?
By David Catron
February 17, 2014
Last week, Jeffrey Lord asked
the following question in this space: “Should Obama be impeached?” I have
enormous respect for Lord, and agree with virtually everything he writes, but
his column reflects an unsettling trend in the way many view this issue. Most
pundits and politicians discuss Obama’s serial violations of the Constitution
as if mulling an interesting academic subject.
They ponder such arcana as the
definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the number of Senate votes
required to convict an impeached President, the effect of the process on the
GOP’s electoral prospects in 2016, ad infinitum. Few, however, discuss
impeachment as a serious possibility or even a rational course of action.
In a less complacent nation, Lord’s question would not be rhetorical. It is
the duty of the House of Representatives to impeach Obama.
Every
member of Congress takes an oath to defend the Constitution and the President
has declared war on that foundational document. Barack Obama is systematically
destroying the checks and balances the framers put in place to limit the power
of the office he holds.
The powers of the Presidency, as the founders conceived
them, were meant to be constrained by two coequal branches of the government —
the national legislature and the judiciary. President Obama routinely flouts
inconvenient laws passed by the former and publicly excoriates the latter when
its rulings displease him.
Much of what this man has done since taking office is clearly illegal, and
he is becoming more and more brazen about it every day. His most recent crime
against the Constitution was, of course, his latest unilateral
revision of the deadline by which businesses must conform to Obamacare’s
employer mandate.
This mandate, according to the stipulations of the health
care “reform” law, should have taken effect January 1. However, that date
proved politically inconvenient for the Democrats, so Obama ordered his minions
to change the deadline — twice — despite lacking any legal authority to do so.
What has been done by the people invested with the power to put a stop to such
illegal decrees? Virtually nothing.
Why not? In the words
of Senator Ted Cruz, “There aren’t enough votes in the Senate.” I admire
Senator Cruz, but he is evidently confused. It is true that, to remove a
President from office, a two-thirds majority of the Senate must vote to convict
him of charges emanating from the House impeachment process. However,
impeachment itself is a separate step — roughly analogous to an indictment in a
criminal court — and requires only a simple majority in the House of
Representatives. Today, the Republicans control that body by a margin of more
than thirty seats. In other words, one or more articles of impeachment could be
passed against Obama in the House of Representatives without a single Democrat
vote.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.