Obama's Last Stand

anatta

100% recycled karma
A flurry of big decisions out of the Obama administration just weeks before President-elect Donald Trump takes office has rekindled Republican concerns about President Obama’s plans for jamming through so-called “midnight regulations” and other leftover items from his wish-list on his way out the door.

In the last week alone, the Obama administration blocked future oil and gas leases in swaths of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans; granted a record number of pardons and commutations for a single day; and scrapped a dormant registry for male immigrants from a list of largely Muslim countries.

Defense officials told Fox News there is an effort underway to transfer up to 22 additional detainees out of Guantanamo Bay
. And Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations stunned Israel on Friday by abstaining on a Security Council measure condemning settlement activity, allowing it to pass.

And Obama still has a month left in office. The most recent announcements were made while the first family was on vacation in Hawaii – leaving unclear what Obama has in store for when he gets back to Washington.

GINGRICH: OBAMA IN 'DESPERATE FRENZY'

Hanging over any final actions is the likelihood that Trump, once in office, will roll back many of them. “The things he’s done this week will be turned around,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said of Obama on “Fox News Sunday.” “He’s in this desperate frenzy.”

But Democrats are urging the outgoing president to pursue further actions, as the administration weighs its next steps.

Among the possibilities:

Sixty-four House Democrats recently asked Obama to use his pardon power to preserve his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which spared millions of illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children from deportation. Led by Rep. Luis Gutiérrez, D-Ill., the lawmakers asked Obama in a letter to “exercise your Constitutional authority to provide pardons to young people who are American in every way but on paper.” The goal is to make it more difficult for Trump to potentially deport them.

The White House already has teed up the strong possibility of more clemency for nonviolent drug offenders and others. After Obama pardoned 78 people and granted another 153 commutations on Monday, White House Counsel Neil Eggleston said he expects “more grants of both commutations and pardons before [Obama] leaves office.”

Former President Jimmy Carter has called on Obama to go further in the Middle East and recognize a Palestinian state before leaving office. In a New York Times op-ed, he wrote: “The simple but vital step this administration must take before its term expires on Jan. 20 is to grant American diplomatic recognition to the state of Palestine.”

The White House has expressed reluctance to take some of these steps.

White House spokesman Eric Schultz said “there is a process at the Department of Justice to review pardon applications” and “the president has said he is not going to do anything to circumvent that process.” As for Carter’s appeal, Schultz said, “I don't think [Carter’s] views are new today, so I don't have any new positions or views from us on that.”

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest also said recently that any executive actions the president takes at this stage likely were in the works before the November election.

“What I can rule out are any sort of hastily added executive actions that weren’t previously considered that would just be tacked on at the end,” Earnest said.

Regulation ‘Finish Line’

While Obama weighs his last batch of policy decisions, many regulations already are coming through the pipeline. The final plans reportedly include as many as 98 regulations classified as “economically significant,” meaning each would cost the economy $100 million through compliance and consumer impact.

According to an analysis by the conservative American Action Forum, based on the Federal Register agenda, the administration is eyeing $44.1 billion in “midnight regulations” – or rules pushed in the final two months of an outgoing administration.

“This has been the most active December ever for regulations,”
Sam Batkins, AAF’s director of regulatory affairs.

Gina McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, didn’t conceal her eagerness in a staff memo sent after the election.
“As I’ve mentioned to you before, we’re running—not walking—through the finish line of President Obama’s presidency,” McCarthy wrote.
By late November, the EPA announced stronger greenhouse gas emission standards, pushing 54.1 miles-per-gallon fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks for model years 2022-2025. In mid-November, the Interior Department finalized a rule to cut methane emissions during oil and natural gas production on federal lands.

Among regulations expected to take effect: the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services plans to make it easier for employers to sponsor highly skilled immigrants in the country;
the Education Department is working on student debt relief at for-profit colleges; and on the financial services side, the Federal Reserve and the Securities and Exchange Commission are working on matters such as executive pay and mutual fund management.


According to an administration official, the number of active rules at the end of this administration still is 15 percent lower than at the end of the George W. Bush administration. The administration also notes that some economically significant regulations help the economy.

Republican Roll-Back

Congressional Republicans are bent on stopping or reversing the onslaught of new rules.

In a Dec. 5 letter, 20 Republican senators asked Obama to “honor the will of the American people and refrain from working on or issuing any new, non-emergency regulations while carrying out your remaining term in office.”

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., in a Nov. 15 letter to federal agency heads signed by other House committee chairmen, asserted, “we will work with our colleagues to ensure that Congress scrutinizes your actions—and, if appropriate, overturns them.”

The Congressional Review Act of 1996 allows Congress, with the president’s signature, to rescind regulations and prohibit agencies from imposing rules that are substantively the same.

That, however, would have limits even when Trump takes office, Batkins said.

“Congress can rescind regulations when it gets back, using the CRA, but the House and Senate will be working on health care, the economy and infrastructure,” Batkins told FoxNews.com. “Congress has a lot on its plate. Of the 100 or more midnight regulations that could fly through, there probably won’t be more than a dozen they would be interested in repealing.”

Asked at a November press conference about GOP calls to hold off on finalizing rules in his final weeks in office, Obama defended their rulemaking pace: “The regulations that we have issued are ones that we've been working on for a very long time. … These aren't things that we've been surprising people with.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...s-gop-concerns-over-midnight-regs-agenda.html
 
Gina McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, didn’t conceal her eagerness in a staff memo sent after the election.
“As I’ve mentioned to you before, we’re running—not walking—through the finish line of President Obama’s presidency,” McCarthy wrote.
3 more weeks and then we bury you ( in an ephemeral stream bed)
 
All I can figure is that he wants his legacy to be as a polarizing president because that's all he's really accomplishing with his temper tantrum.
He comes across as a cool, likeable guy but he's an arrogant, raging asshole deep inside.
I have very little respect for him any more.
And he's left the dem party in shambles.
 
Trumps hyperweapon will pierce thru the regulations gahahahaha

as_rance6-01.jpg
 
No gratuitous disrespect to FOX / Lead here,
but some bells can be un-rung.

"Obama administration blocked future oil and gas leases in swaths of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans"

Why couldn't President Trump simply unblock them with the same presidential authority?

Or is Trump worried about the stain on his record if there were an oil spill in those delicate ecosystems?

Neither side has clean hands here.

For the Republicans to refuse to fulfill their Constitutionally enumerated obligation of advise & consent to fill the open seat in the SCOTUS is rather the more obvious, more flagrant violation.

There's nothing in the Constitution that says a president has to approve arctic oil drilling leases.
 
No gratuitous disrespect to FOX / Lead here,
but some bells can be un-rung.

"Obama administration blocked future oil and gas leases in swaths of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans"

Why couldn't President Trump simply unblock them with the same presidential authority?

Or is Trump worried about the stain on his record if there were an oil spill in those delicate ecosystems?

Neither side has clean hands here.

For the Republicans to refuse to fulfill their Constitutionally enumerated obligation of advise & consent to fill the open seat in the SCOTUS is rather the more obvious, more flagrant violation.

There's nothing in the Constitution that says a president has to approve arctic oil drilling leases.

the argument is that the treaty that gives obama the right to do this doesnt contain an explicit clause to undo it so its like a one way street.

What will ahppen is trump will undo it then someone will file a case and it will reach the sc. By the time that happens there will be 5 conservative justices.
 
ts #8

Thanks ts.
That's pretty much what I thought.

I have no huge gripe here. But in my opinion:
"GINGRICH: OBAMA IN 'DESPERATE FRENZY'
Is not merely exaggeration, but perhaps (ironically) desperate exaggeration on Gingrich's part, to tamp down the alarm over the frenzy of the Trump administration, which Gingrich would be wise to anticipate.

It's OK.
I get it.
"Ho hum" isn't news.

So FOX is trying to drum up something worthy of water-cooler chatter.

IT'S WORKING!!

Here we are at the water-cooler chattering about it.

I gather it's much ado about little. Other recent presidents have done similar.
 
Obama theory here is to throw enough shiite at the wall,and some of it will stick. Executive orders are over-turned
but maybe some of them won't be. Fer sure getting Congress to do anything is difficult (CRA)
 
#10

Amusing.

Republicans may be planning that same strategy;
to barrage Democrats with so many Trump administration opening gambits that they can't be effectively politically blocked.

Filling Scalia's now empty seat is just the starter. Much more to it than that.

Anyone that has a quantified comparison between Obama's last month in office, and those of his recent presidential predecessors is invited to post it.
 
#10

Amusing.

Republicans may be planning that same strategy;
to barrage Democrats with so many Trump administration opening gambits that they can't be effectively politically blocked.

Filling Scalia's now empty seat is just the starter. Much more to it than that.

Anyone that has a quantified comparison between Obama's last month in office, and those of his recent presidential predecessors is invited to post it.

Democrats would be stupid to fight over Scalia replacement with Ginsberg and Breyer on deaths door

The democrat party can hope for two things

1) trump doesn't keep promise on judges - bad for country bad for Trump
2) we get faux conservative justices like Souter - bad for country

I have always marveled that lefties have never gotten screwed over by democrat party nominees like the right has been screwed
 
#10

Amusing.

Republicans may be planning that same strategy;
to barrage Democrats with so many Trump administration opening gambits that they can't be effectively politically blocked.

Filling Scalia's now empty seat is just the starter. Much more to it than that.

Anyone that has a quantified comparison between Obama's last month in office, and those of his recent presidential predecessors is invited to post it.
it'as hard to compare. Obama also used "presidential memoranda" -the same thing under a different name.

But look at these 2 major outgoings
1) the UN vote on Israeli settlements -effectively changing policy in terms of UN resolutions on Israel
2) the bans on drilling -again changing policy ( or cementing policy)
-both of these as he goes out the door.
That's different. Presidents don't do Big Things in their last month by executive orders
 
He's had 8 years ... why wait until now? Unless he doesn't want to deal with the consequences of all of his own decisions and actions ... which would make him a coward.
 
#13

Does the settlements issue change a U.S. policy position. I thought the U.S. has acknowledged they are illegal for several presidential administrations; whether Republican or Democrat.

Netanyahu has been deliberately, publicly, gratuitously rude to Obama.
This could end up being both good for Netanyahu (a maniac by rational standard) and for the good peoples of Israel as well.

Netanyahu needed to be smacked down. Obama's given him a love-tap.
And if the Israelis know what's good for them, they'll vote Netanyahu out of office entirely.

PS
Procedurally the U.S. didn't "do". It merely refused to block it.
 
The proverbial flury of regulations that a President leaves to try and bolster their legacy without having to deal with the repercussions themselves
 
PS
"He's had 8 years ... why wait until now? Unless he doesn't want to deal with the consequences of all of his own decisions and actions ... which would make him a coward." Bd #14
When accused in debate of not paying income taxes Trump said: - That makes me smart. -

Cowardice might explain it, perhaps.

BUT !!

Ockham's Razor: there are other explanations which make more sense.

The anti-bipartisanship flood began around the time Speaker Gingrich promised his -Contract on America-.

Before that President Reagan and Speaker O'Neill got together and socialized, and made deals.

But MOC treat one another not as colleagues, but as enemies.

The result?
“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

http://www.mediaite.com/online/whit...me-the-shameless-mitch-mcconnell-and-company/
When the U.S. senate minority leader holds his own partisan ambition above the welfare of our U.S. military troops in combat; you know partisanship has gone too far.

President Obama wisely picked his battles.
He didn't want to have to battle Republicans on every possible topic.
So he picked the ones he thought he could win on; and saved things like the Israeli thing, for when consequence wouldn't interfere with the rest of his political agenda.

You call him a coward.
Others might call him a skilled tactician.
 
Back
Top