Get PJ Media on your Apple

Ordered Liberty

Defund Obamacare!

September 19th, 2013 - 4:11 pm

As all this elucidates, Obama himself is already defunding Obamacare. He has already demonstrated beyond cavil that the program is not ready to be applied as the enabling legislation commands. Conservatives need to be better at hammering this theme. Despite the White House campaign to paint them as extremists, Republicans are merely trying to do what Obama is already doing – except do it more fairly and more faithfully to both the terms of the statute and the debate over its passage.

That brings us to propriety. No president has authority to enact law, either by proclamation or by unilaterally repealing selective parts of a statute. Obama’s presumptuous waivers are an unconstitutional perversion of the legislative process. Legislation is about compromise: There would not be law unless lawmakers agreed to swallow provisions they do not like in order to enact the terms they favor.

Courts upset this balance when they invalidate a part of a statute – often a part whose acceptance was necessary to attract support for passage of the whole. But we tolerate this because courts have a justification: A statutory provision may be stricken only if it violates the Constitution, and only because the court has no alternative but to rule on the provision in order to decide a pending case. And courts often take pains not to usurp the legislative function: If an infirm provision is key to a statute, they will simply strike the whole statute rather than rewrite it selectively.

In stark contrast, Obama is not vindicating the Constitution. He is selectively mining the law’s provisions, as well as picking winners and losers in its enforcement, based on political considerations. In our constitutional system, it is the assigned duty of Congress to make those choices; the president’s job is to enforce the law as written. If the law cannot be enforced as written, it should not be enforced at all.

In the case of Obamacare, there is a powerful additional reason to honor this principle: The claim by Obamacare proponents that the healthcare system needed comprehensive reform.

By and large, opponents of Obamacare did not (and do not) deny that our health care system needs reform. But opponents argued that, because a system involving a sixth of our massive economy is so complex, reforms should be undertaken gradually, in the prudent realization that there would be unintended consequences to address. Radical shocks to the system, we argued, ought to be avoided. But no: Obamacare advocates insisted, as they ramrodded through their unpopular 2700-page bill, that we needed comprehensive reform. The system, they told us, is intricately interdependent. It could not be addressed in pieces heedless of the other pieces. Now, however, they risibly contend that the president – not the lawmaking department of government but the executive – can haphazardly tweak parts without affecting other parts.

Worse, they claim he can do so in gross violation of our constitutional commitment to equal protection under the law for every American. A waiver here, but not there. Big corporations relieved of their mandate (because the administration and the Democrats cannot afford the political fallout of higher unemployment heading into the 2014 midterms), but individual Americans told to pay up, pronto. Members of Congress who foisted Obamacare on us protected from its onerous terms, but ordinary citizens who never wanted Obamacare ordered to comply. That is a travesty, and millions of Americans are boiling over it.

Even in a Congress solidly controlled by leftwing Democrats, Obamacare only passed by the skin of its teeth – and only thanks to the rankest kind of back-room deals and fraudulent budgeting. It would never have passed, not in a million years, if the public had been told that corporations would be favored over citizens, and Obama cronies over those without political connections.

What conservative proponents of defunding are seeking is not a repeal. Conservatives seek merely to do what Obama is already doing: defund the law … except conservatives would defund within constitutional norms. This would be a refusal to fund a law accomplished by the branch of government responsible for spending and lawmaking, not by an imperial president who has usurped lawmaking power and would coerce spending in accordance with his political whims, not equal protection of law for all Americans.

That is an argument conservatives can win, shutdown or no shutdown.

More: House GOP to Cruz: How Dare You Allow Reality to Intrude on Our Defunding Fantasy!

<- Prev  Page 2 of 2   View as Single Page

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (33)
All Comments   (33)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Does anybody know if shutting down the government with no CR will ipso facto de-fund Obamacare? maybe the GOPers are onto something after all.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I may sound like a broken record but...

One strategic consideration about a government shut down I never see brought up.
What would happen if the House did send Obama the defunding bill - he vetoes it - shutdown ensues and then....The GOP takes it to the bloody end even if that means total fed shutdown for however long it takes to get the dems to cave?
I would bet Obama would take counter constitutional measures by Presidential order or, decree if you will.This would expose him as a totalitarian at heart. The GOP point could be that the house was w/in its constitutional powers - the President was not - he reverted to leftist/socialist/communistic totalitarianism when he did not get his way, disguised as, for the "common good".
This would also point out that the president could have bargained or legislatively led his party. Maybe offered spending cuts etc.. Instead he is trying to be dictator.
I think it would work like a charm. Krauthammer's, "you cant lead with 1/2 of 1/3 of one branch is nonsense on its face!!
The extra benefit about it would be the press coverage - but naturally the GOP would screw that up too - but they would be able to keep hammering home their point.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I'm of a mind just to let this abomination continue and when it collapses which it certainly will then the blame rests solely with the Democrats because they "passed" it by stretching the rules without a single, solitary Republican vote. When this thing augers in and takes the economy with it, THEY will be held accountable and will lose their power for years to come.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Posted this on Bill Straubs article today:

The passage of Obamacare and the strangulus bill in The One's first half of his first term resulted in the House being taken over mainly by Tea-Party conservatives in the 2010 national elections. Are we now going to forget this and succumb to the Rinos in their acquiescence to the dims? In MHO, I think not! Keep a stiff upper lip, damn the torpedoes, and hunker down as the federal government comes to a halt, just like it does every weekend. The longer this shutdown lasts, the lesser we need a raise in the debt ceiling.

1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
On the other hand......We could pass ACA Immediately and let the good ole folks find out it is not free, it will limit you and your doctor, it will bankrupt you and America, the government will be making decisions for you, etc...
They will remember in 14 and R's take the Senate & keep the House. May even help in 16.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If there is a shut down it's the Senate's fault. Really. The House passed funding for the government.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I love that they at least did it, but Obama is King and will veto ...
So why all the excitement?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I don't think there's any argument to win. Nobody's arguing. Republicans have proposed defunding, Democrats will reject it, and the stalemate will continue.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
These arguments make no sense.
There is NO NEED to " D E F U N D " ObamieKare.
There is NO NEED to worry about Barry Obama Vetoing the Spending Bills.

Merely pass a SERIES of Spending Bills:
One for Social Security.
One for the Military.
One for Agriculture. . . . ..
etc.

But, by Gosh - - There is NO spending bill for anyone or anything connected with ObamieKare.
No Bureaucrats. . . .. . . .No Commissars, No Czars, No IRS enforcers,

Now, President Barry Obama and the Senate will have to defend rejecting all those positive things ..... ... Barry won't pay the soldiers, the farmers, the old people. . . . . .

THAT would put the blow-back directly in the Dems face.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Andrew, while you present a compelling argument, I fear it's grounded on unrealistic expectations.

You are willing to "bet he'll cave". What if that's a bad bet? Let's say the government shuts down. It's a virtual certainty that Republicans will get blamed given the fawning, complicit mainstream media and the bully pulpit. Please remember most Americans are low-information voters.

We potentially lose our very best chance to retake the Senate (thereby giving us REAL leverage going forward) and perhaps even endanger the House majority.

Is it worth it?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Econ, you know we republicans will be blamed anyway, so just do the right thing.
and this is the right thing.

I will vote for those who vote to defund.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I will vote, speak for and financially support those who vote to defund. The GOP has been a bunch of craven pansies of late—give me a reason to support you. Today's vote on H.J. Res.59 was a start. Follow through.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I respectfully disagree.
Famous lost causes that led to something bigger:
Thermopile
Alamo
Bataan
Wake Island
Famous Victories that shouldn't have been
Waterloo
Israel, everytime
Midway
Battle of Britain
Famous victories where one side never entered the fray.
None
Famous victories where one side was so afraid of loosing it ran away and thus won
None
"You can afford to loose all the battles but the last one" WS Churchill.
I add, you must first enter the arena.
ta
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Thermopylae and the Alamo were losses, but both accomplished the same thing: the shifted the momentum of the war and gave others time to prepare. Both the Spartans and the Texans knew beforehand they were going to fight a battle they would die in, but stood and fought all the same. They died so others could live free.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All