US Politics: Kill (the) Bill

[Kalbear]

24 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

Alright but is there anything that demostrated that Obama E.O were more impactful than other Presidents E.O? Is there something shows that as a percentage is higher than the other Presidents? 

The arguement that appears to get thrown out is that Obama went overboard in E.O and that is not supported. 

That's fair. I took it to mean that simply Obama didn't get the laws passed, only EOs, and as a result they're gone as soon as he is. Which sucks. 

 

[TheKitttenGuard]

8 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

That's fair. I took it to mean that simply Obama didn't get the laws passed, only EOs, and as a result they're gone as soon as he is. Which sucks. 

 

It just another example that you elect someone who are in general closer to your ideas on matters like this. Especially when a whole Party has decided to deny it's existence.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

25 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

That's fair. I took it to mean that simply Obama didn't get the laws passed, only EOs, and as a result they're gone as soon as he is. Which sucks.

 Though in retrospect, the same will be true for Trump. So overall this is probably a good thing.

[Kalbear]

Just now, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 Though in retrospect, the same will be true for Trump. So overall this is probably a good thing.

It's a thing. 

It makes government and planning extremely hard and annoying, and is another indicator of the dysfunction the US is currently witnessing. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

It's a thing. 

It makes government and planning extremely hard and annoying, and is another indicator of the dysfunction the US is currently witnessing. 

Well we're always bitching about how executive power has grown out of control. I think it would be much worse and even more confusing if EO's were considered to be permanent and immutable. 

[Kalbear]

4 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Well we're always bitching about how executive power has grown out of control. I think it would be much worse and even more confusing if EO's were considered to be permanent and immutable. 

Well, sure. What we should probably do is have a specific limit on EO timing that requires them to either be passed into law or stricken automatically, and have that limit be pretty short. 

[Swordfish]

1 hour ago, Mexal said:

Yea but the public nature of the hearing matters and the Senate seems to be doing all of their investigation in private. I wanted to hear what Yates had to say from her mouth, not through intermediaries that may never actually come out.

Why?  It's mostly a dog and pony show to be honest.  you could make a very solid argument that the public nature of the hearings is part of the problem, because the house members switch into campaign mode and basically start mugging for the camera, instead of doing any actual investigating.  Questions turn into speeches.

[Tywin et al.]

1 hour ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

Alright but is there anything that demostrated that Obama E.O were more impactful than other Presidents E.O? Is there something shows that as a percentage is higher than the other Presidents? 

I'm currently unaware if there is, but it's certainly a project that political scientists could do. In fact, it wouldn't be that difficult if you could create a measurement system that would withstand peer reviews (although creating the system itself could prove to be quite difficult). 

1 hour ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

The arguement that appears to get thrown out is that Obama went overboard in E.O and that is not supported. 

I think the claim is overblown, but simply looking at the number of Executive Orders isn't the best way to dispel it.

 

[TheKitttenGuard]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

I'm currently unaware if there is, but it's certainly a project that political scientists could do. In fact, it wouldn't be that difficult if you could create a measurement system that would withstand peer reviews (although creating the system itself could prove to be quite difficult). 

I think the claim is overblown, but simply looking at the number of Executive Orders isn't the best way to dispel it.

 

Yes but without a categorization of Executive in level of impact what exactly is someone complaining of.  Several E.O can sound terrible or great but more in depth can show they mostly are very limited in either case.

I agree a raw number is far from perfect but what do you have when a person is stating someone is ruling by dictate. 

[Swordfish]

50 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

Yes but without a categorization of Executive in level of impact what exactly is someone complaining of.  Several E.O can sound terrible or great but more in depth can show they mostly are very limited in either case.

I agree a raw number is far from perfect but what do you have when a person is stating someone is ruling by dictate. 

Here is a list of all the orders since Clinton, if you're really curious.

https://www.federalregister.gov/executive-orders

 

 

[DMC]

2 hours ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

Alright but is there anything that demostrated that Obama E.O were more impactful than other Presidents E.O? Is there something shows that as a percentage is higher than the other Presidents? 

The arguement that appears to get thrown out is that Obama went overboard in E.O and that is not supported. 

I am open to information to show the type of E.O Obama issued were more impactful than others.  Again, though, the manner which Obama E.O are argued is that is something very out of line with other Presidents.  The total number may be simple but is there something that shows that the kind Obama issued went further than the others?

Chiou and Rothenberg (2014) developed probably the best continuous measure of policy "significance" for each EO.  Unfortunately, their model is very complicated and their data ended in 2002.  I might get around to replicating it in order to look at the rest of Bush/Obama, but that's gonna be a lotta work.  Howell's (2005) measure is more popularly used in the literature because it's much more easy to replicate, but by the same token it's much more rudimentary.

Anyway, yes, the "impact" of an EO is something that scholars try to measure - but most of these data is not publicly available at the moment.

[Tywin et al.]

1 hour ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

Yes but without a categorization of Executive in level of impact what exactly is someone complaining of.  Several E.O can sound terrible or great but more in depth can show they mostly are very limited in either case.

I agree a raw number is far from perfect but what do you have when a person is stating someone is ruling by dictate. 

They're just being political hacks. I wouldn't read too much into it, and if someone does tell you that President Obama abused EOs more than any other President all you have to say back is "prove it gasbag." It's their obligation to prove the claim has merit.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

They're just being political hacks. I wouldn't read too much into it, and if someone does tell you that President Obama abused EOs more than any other President all you have to say back is "prove it gasbag." It's their obligation to prove the claim has merit.

It might not be valid when you're looking at EO's necessarily, but I think it's fair to say that Obama abused executive privilege on a number of occasions. I suppose Libya and drone usage (particularly against a citizen) being the most egregious examples. 

[Tywin et al.]

18 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

It might not be valid when you're looking at EO's necessarily, but I think it's fair to say that Obama abused executive privilege on a number of occasions. I suppose Libya and drone usage (particularly against a citizen) being the most egregious examples. 

It's certainly fair to say there are examples of Obama abusing his executive privilege, but that's true of basically every President (at least I'm assuming it is). However, examples of abuse don't justify the claims that Obama abused his executive authority more than every other President. 

[Swordfish]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

It's certainly fair to say there are examples of Obama abusing his executive privilege, but that's true of basically every President (at least I'm assuming it is). However, examples of abuse don't justify the claims that Obama abused his executive authority more than every other President. 

The other issue is that I think we've seen incremental creep when it comes to the power of the executive.  So saying 'Obama did about the same as bush' doesn't necessarily tell the whole story of gradually expanding executive power, which i think is a fairly non controversial issue.

[Tywin et al.]

 

On 3/24/2017 at 5:15 PM, Kalbear said:

So basically it was now or never for repeal, and they wanted to at least have the option to say they tried. 

Maybe Trump did, but Ryan absolutely wanted the AHCA to pass. 

6 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

The other issue is that I think we've seen incremental creep when it comes to the power of the executive.  So saying 'Obama did about the same as bush' doesn't necessarily tell the whole story of gradually expanding executive power, which i think is a fairly non controversial issue.

There's no need to say you think, it's pretty blatant at this point. That said, I don't see the gradual expansion of executive power during Obama's two terms as synonymous with him abusing it more (though it could certainly lead to it with Trump or another hypothetical figure). 

[Larry of the Lawn]

If i remember correctly, the expansion of executive power from FDR onward was a major theme in highschool US History.

[Mexal]

House and Senate (all Republicans) voted to allow broadband providers to sell private activity data without permission. I hate these people.

[TheKitttenGuard]

Swordfish and Dmc515, 

Thank you for the links.  They are extensive and will take sometime to fully review. 

Tywin et al,

I do understand politically hackery.  It is one of those moment where an incessant point that been challenge before yet still is brought up.  The fact that many responded but not Commodore states a lot.

[OldGimletEye]

I was just thinking about this.

Remember this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Young-Guns-Generation-Conservative-Leaders/dp/1451607342

Quote

Make no mistake: Congressmen Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, and Kevin McCarthy are proud Republicans. But they believe the party had lost sight of the ideals it believes in, like economic freedom, limited government, the sanctity of life, and putting families first. This isn’t your grandfather’s Republican party. These Young Guns of the House GOP—Cantor (the leader), Ryan (the thinker), and McCarthy (the strategist)—are ready to take their belief in the principles that have made America great and translate it into solutions that will make the future even better, solutions that will create private sector jobs, maximize individual freedom, and establish a better world for our children. This groundbreaking book is a call to action that sets forth a plan for growth, opportunity, and commitment that will propel this country to prosperity once again. Together, the Young Guns are changing the face of the Republican party and giving us a new road map back to the American dream.

So what actually happened, given this book's grand declarations?

1. Well, it seems to me Cantor spent most of this time sliming around John Boehner's general area looking to put a knife in Boehner's back, by "out conservating" Boehner. But, it seems Cantor didn't look over his own shoulder well enough, while trying to fuck over Boehner, because Cantor would end up getting "out conservative-ited" by another.

2. And now here we are in 2017. And here is Ryan's and McCarthy's big chance to "implement bold conservative solutions for America in the 21st Century" or whatever horseshit was being pushed in the book. And how are they doing? Epic fail on getting their healthcare bill passed. Both a disaster on policy and politically.

"Young Guns"*

Laugh, Snicker, Guffaw 

*although all of them were middle age when the book was written. But, hey you know, don't let facts get in the way of a conservative narrative.