Obama’s 2016 resolution — advance the regulatory state across the board

posted at 8:01 pm on January 4, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

Well, a man has to have a hobby — and a hobby horse. It won’t just be law-abiding gun owners who shoulder the brunt of Barack Obama’s attempts to build a legacy in the final full year of his time in the White House. Timothy Noah reports this morning that the White House has nearly 4,000 new regulations coming down the pike, ranging from gun control to Gitmo to the national plague of … e-cigarettes?

Nearly 4,000 regulations are squirming their way through the federal bureaucracy in the last year of Barack Obama’s presidency — many costing industry more than $100 million — in a mad dash by the White House to push through government actions affecting everything from furnaces to gun sales to Guantanamo. …

Much of this work will be carried out in the coming months by career bureaucrats working in the bowels of federal agencies, but the cumulative effect adds up to something larger: A final-year sprint by a president intent on using executive power to improve the lives of American workers and consumers — in many instances over loud objections from the businesses that will have to pay for it.

The work must be done swiftly in most cases because any regulation finalized after May 17 or thereabouts risks being blocked by Congress.

Well, maybe. Noah notes that Congress has 60 legislative days to vote to reject any regulatory changes, and that makes May 17 a rough deadline for the end of this session and Obama’s term. However, Congress has to pass the rejection as legislation, which means Obama can veto it — and Republicans probably don’t have enough Democrats to override the veto anyway.

After the deadline, Congress can pass the bills and have the next president sign them, Noah says in citing the urgency for Obama’s actions. However, if Republicans win the White House, those regulations are likely toast anyway regardless of what Congress does. And if Republicans don’t win the White House, then it’ll be the same status quo as now.

The dizzying amount of regulatory changes reflects the focus on unilateral power that Obama has ever since getting shellacked in two midterm elections. Rather than work with Congress on what possibilities still exist — tax reform, for instance — Obama wants to act provocatively by imposing his will on Americans through more rules and “redefinitions” of regulations. Among the latter is a redefinition of gun sellers, expected to be Obama’s big reveal next week. Never mind that literally none of the high-profile incidents that the White House is using to push its gun-control agenda has anything to do with this change — it’s a long-time gun-control agenda item, and Obama wants to check the box.

Obama also wants the FDA to extend its authority over e-cigarettes, at a potential cost of $810 million to the industry over the next generation:

E-cigarettes: The FDA also has in the works a rule extending its jurisdiction to e-cigarettes, which have become wildly popular with teenagers. (Last spring the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that e-cigarette use by high school students tripled in 2014 to 13.4 percent.) The rule, which may ban the use of e-cigarettes by anyone under the age of 18, was first proposed 20 months ago, and a final version has been awaiting clearance from the Office of Management and Budget since October. “They’re being marketed to youth,” says the Center for Effective Government’s White. “It’s a huge problem.” Depending on the final composition of the rule, which may regulate other new tobacco products as well, its cost over 20 years could be anywhere from $20 million to $810 million, which might well put e-cigarettes out of business.

That’s clearly the intent. However, extension of authority in a federal agency should come from Congress, not the executive branch, and especially not the agency itself. Federal agencies under Obama’s governance have made a habit of this unconstitutional arrogance, which is a bit ironic considering Obama’s claims to be a constitutional scholar previous to his political career.

Unfortunately, elections have consequences. If Republicans want to reverse the massive expansion of the regulatory state, they had better figure out how to win the White House. When they do, the next President will have a very busy 2017 in reversing all of the nonsense that will transpire in 2016, let alone from 2009-2015.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Day afer day, making Jimmy Carter look better and better by every utterance.

I repeat:
A Complete and Utter Fraud.

Missilengr on January 4, 2016 at 8:07 PM

he didn’t even bother to make Congress pass an enabling act.

wolly4321 on January 4, 2016 at 8:11 PM

he didn’t even bother making Congress pass an Enabling act

wolly4321 on January 4, 2016 at 8:13 PM

Unfortunately, elections have consequences. If Republicans want to reverse the massive expansion of the regulatory state, they had better figure out how to win the White House.

Ed – you silly man!

Just what on earth makes you think the Republicans will do anything different?

Except Trump or potentially Cruz, and GOPe president will join what has become the Tyrannical Establishment.

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 8:15 PM

Unfortunately, elections have consequences. If Republicans want to reverse the massive expansion of the regulatory state, they had better figure out how to win the White House.

They sure do Ed. Did you happen to catch what our vile congress did to us last year 2014, and the nice 2015 Christmas bill present for obama? No hip check, brush back there eh?

arnold ziffel on January 4, 2016 at 8:16 PM

Unfortunately, elections have consequences. If Republicans want to reverse the massive expansion of the regulatory state, they had better figure out how to win the White House.

Ed – you silly man!

Just what on earth makes you think the Republicans will do anything different?

Except Trump or potentially Cruz, and any GOPe president will join what has become the Tyrannical Establishment.

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 8:15 PM

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 8:16 PM

sorry for the double post. This new phone sucks.

wolly4321 on January 4, 2016 at 8:16 PM

so what about 0 nicotine ejuice?
flavored Vegetable Glycerine or Propylene Glycol now going to be called tobacco?
every dealer I deal with reqs 18+ yrs old anyway.

dmacleo on January 4, 2016 at 8:18 PM

Thank you president 0bama!

I can’t remember the idiot that first wrote that here.

Wonder what he thinks about it now?

cozmo on January 4, 2016 at 8:21 PM

This is why every GOPe Senator and Rep running in 2016 needs to be defeated. They won’t of course, but the only reason Obama is doing this is because the GOP did nothing for seven years to deter it.

I don’t blame Obama; he’s a Marxist. This is incremental steps toward Marxism. It’s the McConnell/Boehner and now Ryan wing of the GOP that is to blame. And why I left them behind.

BKeyser on January 4, 2016 at 8:23 PM

Thank you president 0bama!

I can’t remember the idiot that first wrote that here.

Wonder what he thinks about it now?

cozmo on January 4, 2016 at 8:21 PM

Does it matter?

Anyone who would ever say that is announcing their Stalinistic totalitarian tendencies loud and clear.

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 8:23 PM

This relationship has been very much like a husband, Obama, who is married to a wife, we the people, and where the husband would love to love the wife, and tries to, if only she were good enough, if only she would this or that. That maudlin and contrived perspective, sympathetic to the husband, obfuscates the simple truth that the husband doesn’t love his wife or consider her an equal.

When you realize how sick and dysfunctional this relationship has been, people being enamored with Trump makes more sense. Staying with the metaphor, Trump seems to think we the people are good enough. He isn’t talking about trying to change us, but rather our situation.

#Cruz2016

Axe on January 4, 2016 at 8:27 PM

Where does “Constitutional Scholar” Obama even think he has the authority to do this?

Obama Executive Order May Require Those Selling Even a Single Firearm to Become Licensed Dealers http://freebeacon.com/issues/obama-executive-order-may-require-those-selling-even-a-single-firearm-become-licensed-dealers/

Torcert on January 4, 2016 at 8:34 PM

Unfortunately, elections have consequences.

Why?

spmat on January 4, 2016 at 8:34 PM

Well, maybe. Noah notes that Congress has 60 legislative days to vote to reject any regulatory changes,

Been holding my breath since 2009. Turning blue here, fellas.

Limerick on January 4, 2016 at 8:36 PM

Where does “Constitutional Scholar” Obama even think he has the authority to do this?

Torcert on January 4, 2016 at 8:34 PM

The fact that no one has the stones or political will to stop him.

antipc on January 4, 2016 at 8:38 PM

Unfortunately, elections have consequences.

Why?

spmat on January 4, 2016 at 8:34 PM

Now that is a good question.

Isn’t the Constitution suppose to protect We the People from arbitrary and capricious government?

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 8:38 PM

which might well put e-cigarettes out of business.

…I have been dealing with over-reach by FDA for two years since new Law was passed…Congress passed this Law (HR 3204) and then FDA attached cumbersome volumes of regulations to enforce the Law, many in clear violation of either Congressional “intent” or existing Law…and it’s threatening to wipe-out my entire industry…

…believe it or not, deep inside the recent $1.1 TRILLION Omnibus bill was language that actually defunded FDA’s attempt to enforce the Law, and additional demands that FDA peel back some of these onerous regulation…

..so while on the one hand I was vehemently opposed to Omnibus (and told my Reps as much)…on the other I was pleasantly surprised that Congress actually listened to our plea for help in reigning-in FDA…it was quite a shock…

Pelosi Schmelosi on January 4, 2016 at 8:40 PM

This next year will be what a hostile, Muslim advocate, American hating affirmative action hire looks like when a Congress that has been terrified of this black man for the last 7 years will be humping his leg along with the media for his last year. I believe the Republic is in peril…..

HatfieldMcCoy on January 4, 2016 at 8:40 PM

Congress needs to take its power back instead of ceding it to the executive. Of course, that would mean Congress actually doing some work instead of fundraising for their next campaign.

rbj on January 4, 2016 at 8:41 PM

Isn’t the Constitution suppose to protect We the People from arbitrary and capricious government?

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 8:38 PM

Only if you have someone in the government that will do something about it.

Otherwise, you only have some parchment with a bunch of old English words on it.

Those politicians don’t exist anymore.

They have become an oligarchy which only serves themselves.

You lose.

Walter L. Newton on January 4, 2016 at 8:43 PM

Does MKH no longer work for HA?

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2016 at 8:43 PM

Thank you president 0bama!

I can’t remember the idiot that first wrote that here.

Wonder what he thinks about it now?

cozmo on January 4, 2016 at 8:21 PM

Thank you, President Obama!

Ned Pepper on August 11, 2014 at 3:47 PM

ShainS on January 4, 2016 at 8:44 PM

Unfortunately, elections have consequences. If Republicans want to reverse the massive expansion of the regulatory state, they had better figure out how to win the White House.

In other words DUMP TRUMP!

Despite all the howling, he’s unelectable in the general election.

Happy Nomad on January 4, 2016 at 8:45 PM

The tyranny continues, unabated.

Thanks for nothing, Ryan and Turtle.

Joe Mama on January 4, 2016 at 8:46 PM

This next year will be what a hostile, Muslim advocate, American hating affirmative action hire looks like when a Congress that has been terrified of this black man for the last 7 years will be humping his leg along with the media for his last year. I believe the Republic is in peril…..

HatfieldMcCoy on January 4, 2016 at 8:40 PM

I think you’re right.

Mimzey on January 4, 2016 at 8:48 PM

In other words DUMP TRUMP!

Despite all the howling, he’s unelectable in the general election.

Happy Nomad on January 4, 2016 at 8:45 PM

Potentially … but is there anyone who is more electable?

As a Cruz girl, would love to see him as Prez, but I just don’t see him getting the independents for Dem cross-overs.

And the GOPe will never vote for a Trump or a Cruz, so Trump is our best shot.

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 8:50 PM

Speaking of resolutuions and great news:

Chad Pergram [email protected] 6h6 hours ago

Rep Jim McDermott (D-WA) retiring after 14 terms.
https://twitter.com/ChadPergram
===============================

Casualty List: 114th Congress (2015-2016)
Last Updated: Jan. 4, 2016
***************************

Running for Other Office – (2 House: 2D; 1 Senate: 1R)
House:
Senate:

John Carney, D-Del., 59, 3 terms
Janice Hahn, D-Calif., 63, 2 terms

Marco Rubio, R-Fla., 43, 1 term

Running for Senate – (14 House: 7D, 7R)
House:
Senate:

Charles Boustany Jr., R-La., 59, 6 terms
Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., 38, 2 terms
Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., 47, 2 terms
Donna Edwards, D-Md., 57, 5 terms
John Fleming, R-La., 64, 4 terms
Alan Grayson, D-Fla., 57, 3 terms (did not serve 2011-13)
Joe Heck, R-Nev., 54, 3 terms
David Jolly, R-Fla., 42, 1 term
Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz., 65, 3 terms
Patrick Murphy, D-Fla., 32, 2 terms
Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., 55, 10 terms
Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., 39, 3 terms
Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., 56, 7 terms
Todd Young, R-Ind., 42, 3 terms

n/a

Retiring – (17 House: 12R, 5D; 5 Senate: 2R, 3D)
House:
Senate:

Dan Benishek, R-Mich., 63, 3 terms
Lois Capps, D-Calif., 77, 9 terms
Sam Farr, D-Calif., 74, 12 terms
Michael G. Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., 52, 4 terms
Chris Gibson, R-N.Y., 51, 3 terms
Richard Hanna, R-N.Y., 64, 3 terms
Rubén Hinojosa, D-Texas, 75, 10 terms
Robert Hurt, R-Virginia, 46, 3 terms
John Kline, R-Minn., 68, 7 terms
Cynthia M. Lummis, R-Wyo., 61, 4 terms
Jim McDermott, D-Wash., 79, 14 terms
Candice S. Miller, R-Mich., 61, 7 terms
Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas, 65, 6 terms
Rich Nugent, R-Fla., 64, 3 terms
Joe Pitts, R-Pa., 76, 10 terms
Charles B. Rangel, D-N.Y., 85, 23 terms
Edward Whitfield, R-Ky., 72, 11 terms

Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., 74, 4 terms
Dan Coats, R-Ind., 72, 2 full terms (also served 1989-1999)
Barbara A. Mikulski, D-Md., 79, 5 terms
Harry Reid, D-Nev., 75, 5 terms
David Vitter, R-La., 54, 2 terms

Resigned – (3 House: 3R)
House:
Senate:

John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, 65, 13 terms
Michael G. Grimm., R-N.Y., 45, 2 terms
Aaron Schock, R-Ill., 34, 4 terms

n/a

Died – (1 House: 1R)
House:
Senate:

Alan Nunnelee, R-Miss., 56, 3 terms

n/a

http://www.rollcall.com/politics/casualtylist.html/

canopfor on January 4, 2016 at 8:50 PM

Heard Rand Paul for a few minutes before turning it off on Laura Ingraham’s radio show today talking about some Congressional Act he’s introducing or sponsoring or whatever to counteract DogEater’s EO’s called the “Separation of Powers Act”.

[Looked it up and found one he sponsored in 2013 — presumably the same: S. 82 (113th): Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection Act of 2013]

I mean, you just can’t make this stuff up. A BANANA REPUBLIC, if you can keep it …

ShainS on January 4, 2016 at 8:52 PM

This is why every GOPe Senator and Rep running in 2016 needs to be defeated. They won’t of course, but the only reason Obama is doing this is because the GOP did nothing for seven years to deter it.

I don’t blame Obama; he’s a Marxist. This is incremental steps toward Marxism. It’s the McConnell/Boehner and now Ryan wing of the GOP that is to blame. And why I left them behind.

BKeyser on January 4, 2016 at 8:23 PM

Oh yeah, relacing every moderate conservative GOP legislator with a loony-left lets turn all of America into San Francisco Democrat will really help a lot./s I am in a swing district. We can either elect a moderate conservative Republican like Nan Heyword or a leftist Dem that pretends to care about the people instead of just advancing the left ideology like Murphy or John Hall. You prefer the latter apparently; but I do not and do not say we can nominate a Ted Cruz conservative because when we do, they lose in a landslide. William Buckley was absolutely right, nominate the most conservative candidate that can win. Do not have pyric victory primary victories that just strengthen Nancy Pelosi after the general election.

KW64 on January 4, 2016 at 8:54 PM

The Run-Up to Gun Grabby:
————————


United States
2h
White House: President Obama to propose overhaul to background check system in gun sales, $500 million investment in mental health care
End of alert

http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/white-house-gun-control-proposals/
============

Chad Pergram [email protected] 11h11 hours ago

Ryan on Obama’s potential executive action on guns: This is a dangerous level of executive overreach, and the country will not stand for it.
==============

Chad Pergram [email protected] 11h11 hours ago

Ryan: Ever since he was a candidate, President Obama’s dismissiveness toward Americans who value the 2nd Amendment has been well-documented
=====================

Chad Pergram [email protected] 11h11 hours ago

House Dems chair of gun violence task force Mike Thompson (D-CA) & other Dems expected at WH today to discuss ways to combat gun violence
============

Chad Pergram [email protected] 11h11 hours ago

Obama meets this pm w/AG Lynch, FBI Dir Comey about potential executive action on firearms.

https://twitter.com/ChadPergram

canopfor on January 4, 2016 at 8:54 PM

Sean Maloney not “Murphy”

KW64 on January 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM

The Chitty-Chatty Gun Grabbeth:
——————————


Chad Pergram [email protected] 2h2 hours ago

CA Rep & Dem gun task force chair Thompson on Obama gun plan: The actions taken today by President Obama will help save some of those lives.
============

2016 US elections
40m
Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton on President Obama’s executive actions on gun control: ‘I am so proud of what the president announced today’ – @KThomasDC
See original on twitter.com
============================

Gabrielle Giffords

@GabbyGiffords

Thank you, @POTUS, for standing up to the gun lobby when Congress won’t & ensuring fewer guns fall into the wrong hands. #StopGunViolence
7:20 PM – 4 Jan 2016
====================

Boston, MA
1h
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh says he will join President Obama in taking executive action to reduce gun violence – @marty_walsh
See original on twitter.com
===========================

Barack Obama
2h
Rep. Mike Thompson, chairman of the House Democrats’ gun violence task force, on President Obama’s gun plan: ‘The actions taken today by President Obama will help save some of those lives’ – @ChadPergram
See original on twitter.com

http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/white-house-gun-control-proposals/

canopfor on January 4, 2016 at 9:01 PM

You prefer the latter apparently; but I do not and do not say we can nominate a Ted Cruz conservative because when we do, they lose in a landslide. William Buckley was absolutely right, nominate the most conservative candidate that can win. Do not have pyric victory primary victories that just strengthen Nancy Pelosi after the general election.

KW64 on January 4, 2016 at 8:54 PM

Seemingly reasonable point. So how did 2015 go for us?

arnold ziffel on January 4, 2016 at 9:01 PM

Does MKH no longer work for HA?

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2016 at 8:43 PM

I haven’t seen anything official, OC. Assume she had taken some time off after her husband’s death.

Did find this tweet of hers from 3 hours ago — sounds like maybe we’ll see her again soon (the link is an adorable pic of her and a little one):

Mary Katharine Ham [email protected] 3h

Back at it w oreillyfactor tonight. Hope I’m not too rusty. Arguing with Bill requires practice! https://www.instagram.com/p/BAImjDqCwKg/

ShainS on January 4, 2016 at 9:01 PM

You prefer the latter apparently; but I do not and do not say we can nominate a Ted Cruz conservative because when we do, they lose in a landslide. William Buckley was absolutely right, nominate the most conservative candidate that can win. Do not have pyric victory primary victories that just strengthen Nancy Pelosi after the general election.

KW64 on January 4, 2016 at 8:54 PM

Your ilk said the same thing about Reagan.

If Dole, McCain, Romney, et.al. are the most conservative candidates that can’t win, then we really do need to nominate Nancy Pelosi as the most conservative candidate who can win …

ShainS on January 4, 2016 at 9:07 PM

Yeah, just saw MKH on BOR, debating Juan. She gets as much time as she needs.

rbj on January 4, 2016 at 9:07 PM

ShainS on January 4, 2016 at 9:01 PM

Yeah, I saw her on The Factor…

OmahaConservative on January 4, 2016 at 9:20 PM

canopfor on January 4, 2016 at 8:50 PM

I’ll be glad to see the whole lot of them gone from office.

They should hang their heads in shame, the way they’ve allowed Obama to do as much damage to this nation as he has done.

lineholder on January 4, 2016 at 9:21 PM

I guess this monumental idiot doesn’t realize that it takes ONE stroke of a pen to eliminate his thousands of EOs.

Freedom hating retard. I hope his head explodes if Trump or Cruz is the one elected.

Andy__B on January 4, 2016 at 9:22 PM

I guess this monumental idiot doesn’t realize that it takes ONE stroke of a pen to eliminate his thousands of EOs.

Freedom hating retard. I hope his head explodes if Trump or Cruz is the one elected.

Andy__B on January 4, 2016 at 9:22 PM

Wouldn’t be surprised if Obama tried issuing an EO rescinding the 22nd Amendment.

smokeyblonde on January 4, 2016 at 9:47 PM

I guess this monumental idiot doesn’t realize that it takes ONE stroke of a pen to eliminate his thousands of EOs.

Freedom hating retard. I hope his head explodes if Trump or Cruz is the one elected.

Andy__B on January 4, 2016 at 9:22 PM

…you’ll have to excuse our Odoooshbag…he’s quite ill you know…

Pelosi Schmelosi on January 4, 2016 at 9:49 PM

canopfor on January 4, 2016 at 8:50 PM

I’ll be glad to see the whole lot of them gone from office.

They should hang their heads in shame, the way they’ve allowed Obama to do as much damage to this nation as he has done.

lineholder on January 4, 2016 at 9:21 PM

lineholder: Agreed, its been an exhausting period of
Hope and Change.:)

canopfor on January 4, 2016 at 10:22 PM

so what about 0 nicotine ejuice?
flavored Vegetable Glycerine or Propylene Glycol now going to be called tobacco?
every dealer I deal with reqs 18+ yrs old anyway.

dmacleo on January 4, 2016 at 8:18 PM

Yeah about the only thing they can really regulate is the nicotine. It’s the only drug / tobacco related item involved.

That is of course if you’re smart enough to stock up on some rebuildable atomizers before the law hits.

The organic cotton, VG, PG, Kanthal wire, and flavorings all have alternative unrelated uses and can be bought on Amazon / eBay etc. So good luck on them trying to regulate those individual components.

May become hard to find tobacco flavored flavorings, even if they’re artificial and have no tobacco related ingredients. Only because it would be hard to justify them for any other use. Not like you’re going to use tobacco flavoring in cooking or baking LOL.

Oxymoron on January 5, 2016 at 12:16 AM

Come 2017 and, God willing, a GOP president (to each his own but I’m hoping Cruz): NO charm offensives, NO reaching across the aisle .. NO olive branches to the other side … NO warm-and-fuzzy adjustment interludes … NO “healing” period after a contentious election …

Burn it all. Every last little EO edict from our Supreme Leader. On day one.

OttoParts on January 5, 2016 at 6:59 AM

We don’t need a Republican, we need a conservative (or a Gozer like Trump). And, hopefully, it will go beyond merely reversing 0bama’s unconstitutional regs – he should submit a budget to Congress that thoroughly defunds most of the regulatory vastness. And he should call on Congress to do their damn jobs.

GWB on January 5, 2016 at 8:17 AM

They should hang their heads in shame, the way they’ve allowed Obama to do as much damage to this nation as he has done.

lineholder on January 4, 2016 at 9:21 PM

I would use some of those words in your first clause differently.

GWB on January 5, 2016 at 8:20 AM