Quantcast
Channel: Federal Budget Archives - Bleeding Heartland
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 53

Grassley, Ernst can show they’re serious about executive overreach

$
0
0

The U.S. House voted on February 26 to terminate President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency to build a wall that Congress repeatedly declined to authorize or fund. All 232 Democrats present, including Iowa’s Representatives Abby Finkenauer (IA-01), Dave Loebsack (IA-02), and Cindy Axne (IA-03) backed the resolution, joined by thirteen House Republicans (roll call). Representative Steve King (IA-04) was among 182 Republicans who opposed the joint resolution.

In statements enclosed in full below, Finkenauer, Axne, and Loebsack highlighted the need to defend the checks and balances prescribed by the U.S. Constitution, which grants spending power to Congress.

The National Emergencies Act requires a U.S. Senate vote within eighteen days on any House-approved joint resolution to terminate a presidential declaration. Three Senate Republicans have already pledged to vote for the resolution. More than half a dozen others criticized Trump’s decision and seem open to formally rejecting it.

Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst are not seen as potential supporters of this bipartisan effort. They have never defied the Trump administration and had little to say about the president’s power grab. But given their stature in the Republican caucus and their forceful denunciations of President Barack Obama’s executive actions, Iowa’s senators have an excellent opportunity to show some principles matter more to them than political loyalty.

Luke Hartig explained at the Just Security blog,

President Trump’s national emergency declaration lays out three sources for the funding he intends to use for the border wall. The first two sources — $600 million from a Treasury asset forfeiture fund and $2.5 billion from Department of Defense (DOD) counter-narcotics accounts — are not contingent on the emergency declaration. The third source of money, $3.6 billion from military construction accounts, is the one that draws on the emergency declaration authority and requires the concurrent deployment of U.S. military forces to the border to open up the account.

As Bleeding Heartland discussed here, Ernst had no official comment about Trump asserting his power to redirect funds Congress appropriated for other purposes. Grassley had warned in January,

“The president is threatening emergency action, a national emergency declaration. I don’t think he should do that. I think it’s a bad precedent. And it contravenes the power of the purse that comes from the elected representatives of the people,” […]

But after Trump pulled the trigger, Grassley expressed only mild “concerns about the precedent.” He told reporters, “I wish he wouldn’t have done it,” but punted the question about presidential authority to the courts. UPDATE: Bloomberg’s Sahil Kapur quoted Ernst as saying on February 26, “I am leaning no on the resolution of disapproval,” because “We do have a crisis at the border.” Grassley told Iowa reporters on a February 27 conference call, “I’m leaning towards voting against the disapproval resolution. And I could maybe say I’m leaning quite heavily in that.”

Iowa’s senators would be smarter to stand up to Trump’s lawlessness. Consider:

  • As a U.S. Senate candidate in early 2014, Ernst criticized members of Congress who were “not defending the Constitution” and “not speaking out against the president when he oversteps his bounds, when he makes those [recess] appointments, when he’s appointing czars, when he is producing executive orders in a threat to a Congress that won’t do as he wishes. So he has become a dictator.”
  • Delivering the Republican response to Obama’s State of the Union address in January 2015, Ernst promised the new Republican majority in the Senate would “work to correct executive overreach.”
  • Grassley has long been seen as a vigorous defender of Congressional authority. A Senate floor speech in November 2014 laid out an extended case against Obama’s “abuse of executive power” and disregard for “our system of checks and balances” on several fronts. Excerpts:

    But the core issue is this: under our Constitution, the Congress makes the law. And under Article II, Section 3, the President is charged with taking care that these laws are faithfully executed. […]

    It is no exaggeration to say that the freedom of the American people is at stake. That’s what the Framers believed. In Federalist 51, James Madison wrote that the “separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government” is “essential to the preservation of liberty.” […]

    Let’s go back to the bedrock principles of our country’s founding. The Framers of our Constitution knew an abusive executive when they saw one. They sent the Declaration of Independence to a King who had ignored and abused their legislatures and laws.

  • Grassley and Ernst both denounced Obama’s executive actions on gun control in early 2016. Ernst slammed the “top-down approach that sidesteps Congress and the people we were elected to represent,” while Grassley said, “This is exactly the deliberative process the Founding Fathers entrusted to the Legislative branch of government, not the political agenda of one person.”
  • In a December 2016 Senate floor speech, Grassley asserted,

    The common thread in all this is that the Obama administration frequently failed to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, as is required by our Constitution. And when that doesn’t happen and Congress lets a president get away with it, then we aren’t upholding our oath to the Constitution, which says basically that Congress passes the law. They ought to be a check on the executive branch to see that the laws are faithfully executed. So, a person coming to town to “drain the swamp,” a person by the name of Trump, should prioritize these failures and begin to restore the executive branch to its proper place in government consistent with the checks and balances outlined in our Constitution.

  • In the coming weeks, Iowa’s senators have a chance to show whether their professed commitment to the Constitution is a core value or only a rhetorical weapon to use against Democratic presidents.

    Statement released by Representative Abby Finkenauer on February 26:

    “The Constitution gives the power of the purse to Congress. By trying to go around Congress and repurpose funds meant for military readiness and our troops, the Administration is defying the Constitution and violating our system of checks and balances. Republicans and Democrats joined together today to make clear that we in Congress take our responsibilities under the Constitution seriously and that this emergency declaration should not stand.”

    Statement Representative Cindy Axne provided to Bleeding Heartland on February 26:

    “President Trump’s emergency declaration proclamation sets a dangerous precedent and clearly violates Congress’s exclusive power of the purse. Congress has a responsibility to uphold the Constitution and defend our system of checks and balances.”

    UPDATE: Staff sent this statement from Representative Dave Loebsack on February 27:

    “The President’s move to declare a state of emergency sets a bad precedent and may very well be unconstitutional. Now that the House has made its position clear, instead of wasting time and taxpayer dollars dragging this through the courts, it would be best for the President to put aside his political games and work with Congress. There are many issues that are important to the American people, like creating jobs and growing the economy, that must be addressed. I stand ready to work with anyone to secure the border in a way that is smart and effective.”

    The post Grassley, Ernst can show they’re serious about executive overreach appeared first on Bleeding Heartland.


    Viewing all articles
    Browse latest Browse all 53

    Trending Articles