The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Another end run around Congress

  1. #1
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,419

    Default Another end run around Congress

    It would appear that even "owning" the Senate, the POtUS acknowledges he can't rally support for this kind of treaty.
    President Obama reportedly plans to do an end-run around Congress to forge an international climate change deal, effectively bypassing the Constitution's requirement to get the Senate's approval for a treaty.


    The New York Times reported that the agreement is slated to be signed at a United Nations meeting next year in Paris. However, because the U.S. Senate is unlikely to ratify any international climate treaty, Obama’s negotiators reportedly are working toward an alternative agreement – a “politically binding” deal that would serve in lieu of a bona-fide treaty.


    One expert with the Natural Resources Defense Council told the Times “there’s some legal and political magic to this.”


    The developments underscore the administration’s dim chances of being able to rally the constitutionally mandated two-thirds majority in the Senate to ratify a new international treaty. But at a time when the House already is suing the president over his alleged abuse of executive power, the move to go around Congress is likely to strike a nerve with lawmakers.


    "Once again, the president is trying to go around Congress and ignore Americans who cannot afford more expensive, extreme energy regulations," Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said in a statement.
    Unaffordable energy is what it takes to reduce our economy to third-world status. Remember, Obama promised to send more coal to Africa because coal was the energy they could afford.

    The proposal was described as a hybrid – combining the legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with “new voluntary pledges.”


    By doing so, negotiators reportedly claim the new agreement would not require a ratification vote.
    Under the terms, co-signers would have to enact climate change policies but would be on the honor system for cutting to specific emissions levels and sending money to poor countries.
    However, by controlling the EPA, it won't be difficult to get whatever regulation POTUS wants. Congress doesn't get to approve EPA regulations, it would appear. EPA = the new IRS?
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  2. #2
    Senior Member .44 magnum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,534

    Default

    Da King has spoken...
    “I like one-shot kills where possible and prefer to do all my hunting before I shoot.” ..... Elmer Keith



  3. #3
    Senior Member Henlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,168

    Default

    This is the penalty you are worried about "Countries might then be legally obligated to report their progress toward meeting those pledges at meetings held to identify those nations that did not meet their cuts."

    That once every couple of years we will have to tell the world if we did better or worse at cutting emissions? If I understand the article participation is not even mandatory either. I would probably impeach him for this one.
    Ole and Sven are quietly sitting in a boat fishing, chewing and drinking beer when suddenly Sven says, 'I think I'm gonna divorce my wife - she ain't spoke to me in over 2 months.' Ole sips his beer and says, 'Better think it over...women like that are hard to find.'

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •