Why even have a Congress at all?

Obama’s EPA: Out with democracy, in with bureaucracy | Examiner Editorial | Opinion | Washington Examiner:

In a recent court filing, the EPA estimated that it would need $21 billion and 230,000 new bureaucrats — the equivalent of the entire population of Madison, Wis. — to regulate carbon under the Clean Air Act as currently written. We take this as an obvious absurd conclusion — a sign that the agency should go back to the drawing board. The EPA is instead trying to promulgate looser rules for carbon that have no basis in law. In other words, the EPA is actually rewriting a law that Congress already passed, and doing so without Congress having anything to say about it.

This summer, discussing immigration, President Obama said “the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting.” His Department of Homeland Security soon after announced a policy of suspending deportation proceedings for many illegal immigrants caught violating the law. His Education Department recently offered waivers from the No Child Left Behind Law to states that would substitute the standards set by that law (which passed Congress) with standards created by the Obama White House (which did not pass Congress).

So it’s not surprising that Obama’s former budget director, Peter Orszag, now argues for more bureaucratic control of federal policies and less input from the elected Congress. If the Obama administration keeps unilaterally rewriting so many of the statutes on the books, why even have a Congress at all?

What was that book again, that Chavez gave to Obama?

%d bloggers like this: