“President Smith today rejected calls to move forward with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In his response to Congress, the president stated, ‘I can only conclude that your decision to enact this legislation by a party-line vote was driven more by partisan politics than a legitimate effort to improve health care in the United States.’ Amid a growing media firestorm and calls for impeachment, Democrats vowed to fight the president’s clear violation of the law and failure to respect the Constitution’s establishment of co-equal branches of government.”
Of course, there has been no such headline or story. What we do see, however, is this: “White House rejects subpoena request for Solyndra docs.”
“‘I can only conclude that your decision to issue a subpoena, authorized by a party-line vote, was driven more by partisan politics than a legitimate effort to conduct a responsible investigation,’ Obama’s counsel, Kathryn Ruemmler, wrote in a letter to the top Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce committee.”
From the nightly news and major newspapers, we hear crickets. Irrespective of one’s party affiliation, it is dangerous to grant the executive branch the authority to disregard measures enacted by Congress in accordance with the law. In an era in which legislators are on record saying, “I don’t worry about the Constitution,” we should worry when we read that the president’s lawyer’s justification for failing to comply with a subpoena relating to $500 million in wasted taxpayer money is a party-line vote. Much congressional action results in party-line votes – the PPACA being a perfect example.
Will the same media silence greet some future unconstitutional act when the party affiliations are reversed?