Via email from John S. we have this article on how, as John put in, “Trump’s plans to massively consolidate power under the executive branch.” John stated:
Surely even hard-core Trump fans don’t want that?
Not that you’re a hard core Trump fan. I’m more referring to some of the folks who comment on your posts who clearly are. It’d be interesting to hear both your view and theirs on this issue.
It’s behind a paywall but I managed to capture the text with a quick select and copy. I then pasted it into a text editor for reading.
Just as there is with sources which favor Republicans, strongly suspect the New York Times has engaged in more than a little hyperbole to make Trump look bad.
That said, I am opposed to congress, presidents, judges and regulatory agencies which exceed the scope enumerated in the constitution. That 99.9%, or more, of those regulatory agencies even exists is repugnant to the constitution and to me. That congress “gives”* agencies the authority to create new law as long as they call it a “regulation” instead of a law is just wrong. If a president would consolidate all that power and destroy it, and “salt the earth” where those weeds flourished I would probably give him a pass on doing a task he didn’t have the enumerated power given to him by the Constitution to do such a thing, simply because congress didn’t have the power to create such a powerful agency in the beginning.
But that’s not reality. Hence, I’m sort of “meh” about the claims of doom and gloom. It is sort of like voting when the only options on the ballot are Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao.
* I don’t see where the U.S. Constitution gives congress the ability to delegate their lawmaking authority to any other entity.
Like this:
Like Loading...