I have not read deeply about this ruling, but my thoughts are influenced by the following experience and years of concern about the issues related to this case.
In 2010, I was involved in a
private meeting that approximately 15 long term care insurance experts had with
two Federal regulators tasked with implementing the CLASS Act (a long-term care
insurance program that was supposed to be part of “ObamaCare”).
The regulators’ intentions clearly
violated the Act. When I asked them how they could do something contrary
to the wording of the Act, one responded “I’m comfortable doing so because
we’re making it better.” (may not be an exact quote but the meaning is
accurate). The other then added “We might not get away with it.” (that is
an exact quote)
As the world is much more complicated than at the founding
of our country, I recognize that legislators don’t have the expertise to define
laws precisely. Since that meeting in 2010, I’ve advocated that Congress should
ask the Executive Branch to fill in the details of an intended bill, then to
send it back to Congress for approval.
The practice described above could be time-consuming and
awkward. It might extend across
different Houses and/or Senates so the votes that might have existed to pass
the bill in the first place might be gone by the time the analysis is returned.
Furthermore, the staff cannot foresee everything. The public should be able to comment, which
adds further to the timeline.
The timeline can be shortened with a quicker request from
Congress or with the Executive Branch starting analyses prior to a request from
Congress.
Even if this process worked smoothly, we’d need to be able
to react if something went wrong. Could
specific power be granted to deal with such issues?
As per my previous writings, I believe Separation of Powers
is the key to our success and our future.
Therefore, I have not been comfortable with the growing
power of the Executive branch administrative staff, the use of Executive Orders
by Presidents of each party, the failure of Congress to do its job, etc.
I hope West Virginia v EPA will help shake up Congress to
force it to improve. We’ll need pressure
from the voters and likely other changes to make this happen.
In the meantime, it could be chaotic.
Unfortunately, Congress’s performance is poor. How can
we improve it? Here are some ideas:
1)
Consider outlawing practices that the parties
use to undermine compromise. I’m not
expert in this area but I think there are other such practices that are
questionable. I’m just trying to get
discussion started, more so that strongly advocating specific steps.
a.
The Leader of the House generally does not allow
a bill to come to the floor unless it is supported by a majority of the
majority party. If the majority has 51%
of the seats, 73% of House members might want to vote for a bill but not be
able to bring it to a vote. If the
majority has 60% of the seats, you could still have 70% of the members wanting
a bill but not being able to bring it to a vote. This is disgusting, hence should be outlawed.
b.
Party bosses use committee assignments, etc. to force
members to toe that party’s political line. Maybe we need some reforms in
those areas.
c.
If the Executive branch submits a bill, it
should get a timely vote.
d.
Politicians use tricks to avoid having to get
agreement between the House and Senate on inconsistent bills, such as by
pushing the envelope on what can be considered under budget reconciliation
short cuts.
2) I
support the filibuster (which encourages compromise). However, I think the filibuster should
require continuous speaking as it did in the past. There may be other modifications I would
support.
3) I
believe Ranked Choice voting would help to address this problem, as I’ve
written elsewhere.
4) A
strong (moderate) third-party would also be helpful. Prior to the Trump administration, I felt
that a third-party would not be helpful.
But now, both of our traditional parties are dominated by extremists,
hence neither party seems able to represent the broad center of USA politics.
5) There
are other reforms that would/might be helpful that are not directly related to
this topic:
a.
Executive nominees should get a vote in a
reasonable time frame. A situation such
as Merrill Garland’s should be illegal.
b.
Congress uses a variety of inappropriate
accounting mechanisms, akin to Ponzi schemes and check-kiting.
c.
I think ‘litmus test’ questions for Supreme
Court candidates are improper.
Sources:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment