2018 Jul 1, 12:01am
12,713 views 76 comments
« First « Previous Comments 37 - 76 of 76 Last »
No...or rather, this incarnation of NAFTA will go bye-bye. It is a congressional-executive agreement, so it will take Congress to pass legislation in both houses to rescind it and you know that they won't. But, they will be happy to replace it with a new NAFTA. So, we will get a NAFTA 2. And I'd be careful about wishing for a new King, if I were you. You might just get one. :)
Tell me... are you still forced to buy health insurance or pay a "fine"?
If it's a treaty, while the President can make treaties that the Senate has to ratify, the Constitution does not explicitly require Senate approval to abrogate Treaties. The Precedence is somewhat mixed but in favor of Presidential Abrogation.
But trade agreements are different. Like all modern trade pacts, NAFTA is a congressional-executive agreement created by statute, not treaty. Trump cannot terminate it — or even renegotiate it — without the approval of Congress.The Constitution grants to the president the power to make treaties, subject to approval by two-thirds of the Senate. Our nation's most significant obligations take this form, such as the North Atlantic Treaty that created NATO and the San Francisco Treaty that ended World War II in the Pacific. Presidents also have made some limited international compacts all on their own, though the Constitution doesn't acknowledge this power. President Obama concluded the Paris climate accords and the Iran nuclear deal without the approval of the Senate or House of Representatives. Because Congress never cemented these deals into law, Trump can reverse them with the stroke of a pen on Day One.But trade deals are different, because under the Constitution's Commerce Clause, only Congress may alter our tariff, tax and customs laws. Congress first authorizes the president to reach a trade agreement with certain countries within limited parameters. Once the deal is struck, the president sends it to Congress for enactment into U.S. domestic law. No trade agreement goes into force until Congress passes the statutes that carry out the trade deal's obligations. -- http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-yoo-ku-trump-nafta-20161129-story.html
I'm sure a missed a few other Big Achievements.
So it is legislation. And like all forms of legislation, only Congress can change it, repeal it or the courts can declare it unconstitutional. Now Trump could simply refuse to follow/enforce the law much like Obama's Regime did. But that could be challenged in court.
Article 2205: WithdrawalA Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.
Todd Tucker, fellow, the Roosevelt InstituteCongress can’t block Trump from withdrawing, but he will have other problems to deal with if he does so.The executive branch has exclusive authority over foreign relations. Presidents from William McKinley to Franklin Roosevelt to Jimmy Carter terminated international agreements without explicit congressional authorization — including some that dealt with trade.
Yes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:
MrMagic saysYes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:The dow went up 250% under obama. Does that make obama the best president to date instead?
bob2356 saysMrMagic saysYes you did, a BIG one... your 401K balance:The dow went up 250% under obama. Does that make obama the best president to date instead?The market went up under Obama during QE Infinity. Wow.
he must like doubling of the debt under Obama too, right?
A Party may withdraw from this Agreement six months after it provides written notice of withdrawal to the other Parties. If a Party withdraws, the Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.
The executive branch has exclusive authority over foreign relations
Presidents from William McKinley to Franklin Roosevelt to Jimmy Carter terminated international agreements without explicit congressional authorization — including some that dealt with trade.
Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy R,. FDR
Yeah. TREATIES. Not Congressional-Executive Agreements. Those are just like domestic laws that stay on the books until Congress says otherwise.
How many people paid the fine each year for not having insurance
It's party time, since Republicans switched from bitching about the deficit to pretending it doesn't even exist.
That’s less than the increase in gas prices that afe crushing low income Americans, under Trump
That’s less than the increase in gas prices
Locking Her up?
High gas prices are extremely good - I wish gas was $5-8/gal. This allows development of alternative energy sources (less global warming and/or dependence on Gulf terroristocracies) and really helps state where I live.
It's also very bad for the poor - who often have to drive the farthest commute each day for their jobs since they can't afford to live near the coast in California.Gas taxes are the most regressive taxes out there.
Are you saying that the President has no effect on gas prices?
as we all are adults here (hopefully), we know that Obamacare was a giveaway to insurance companies.
Yes, that was my problem with the mandate. It's wrong to force people to pay a small set of private companies whatever they say you have to pay or face fines.
You do know that Emergency care in US is mandatory ( if not entirely free) , which means that uninsured normally ended up in Emergency costing the Govt
You do know that Emergency care in US is mandatory ( if not entirely free)
« First « Previous Comments 37 - 76 of 76 Last »