Do you mean like Biden deciding not to enforce our immigration laws? Or maybe withholding armaments from Israel that Congress passed and he signed into law? Or forgiving student loans contrary to what the law says and the SCOTUS amplified. Or the myriad of regulations relating to oil leases, exploration, etc. Be specific as to what should happen to a rogue President who thumbs his nose at laws legally passed but he decides not to enforce.SmaptyWolf said:Civilized said:barelypure said:
Trump is campaigning to repeal the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Before 1974 Presidents could decide not to spend all of the money Congress authorized and return the unspent portion back to the General Fund. In effect it set the ceiling of what could be spent. With the passage of this act it set the floor. So if Congress passed a bill calling for $1.4 trillion to be spent that was the minimum amount that was going to be spent and they could add to that amount. Under Impoundment the $1.4 trillion was the max that could be spent and the President could decide to spend less. That sounds like a good thing to me. It could get spending back in check.
Agree. What's the downside of this?
The alternative, current arrangement incentivizes waste and deemphasizes value.
I'd go a step further and incentivize ways to reward departments or endeavors that come in under budget. No different than a developer incentivizing builders and vendors to be economical by sharing in realized cost savings with them.
Maybe I'm missing something. Is this saying that a rogue president should have the power to fully defund any law he doesn't like? If so I can certainly envision some downsides.
I'm sure you're pointing this at Trump but he's not a rouge President, he's an orange President.
