• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who believes Obama will make this executive order

Will he keep his promise


  • Total voters
    35

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,429
Reaction score
35,271
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Stupak, as many on the right have suggested all month long, has waived not based on any definitive change or measure but on a PROMISE (cause Obama or the Senate has never broken one of those) that something would be done. That promise, according to the NYT's:

House Democrats clinched their victory on Sunday with an agreement on abortion. Democratic opponents of abortion rights, led by Representative Bart Stupak of Michigan, announced that they would vote for the legislation after Mr. Obama promised to issue an executive order “to ensure that federal funds are not used for abortion services” if the bill passed.

So my question to everyone is simple. Will Obama actually make good on the promise of this executive order, yes or no?
 
No. Executive Orders in the past have never been held to any level of culpability, and essentially exist as an unenforcable written promise where the prez can break it unilaterally if he so chose to. He has no interest in the populace or even others in his own party. He did this because some of the most centrist Dems would not jump on board otherwise, but since the Congress is going to get completely flushed out in just over 18 months, there's no need to walk a fine line.

Obama's essentially lit the match that Democratic Reps and Senators used to burn their bridges, with help from mein fuhrer Pelosi who resides comfortably in a deep blue state full of idiots and immigrants. Checks and balances be damned.
 
He probably will. There's no down side to doing it because, as noted above, it is not worth a squirt of piss.
 
I think he'll enact the executive order and then repeal it after some time passes. Stupak should have had the wording in the bill, that way it is set in stone. However, what is best is to just have the legislation shot down in the first place.
 
I think he'll enact the executive order and then repeal it after some time passes. Stupak should have had the wording in the bill, that way it is set in stone. However, what is best is to just have the legislation shot down in the first place.

No. Obama will make the executive order and enforce it, and then leave it to a later president to revoke it.
 
About ten minutes ago one of the Republicans asked to have the text of the order inserted into the bill. As if any of the proponents was about to let something like that happen ...
 
Anybody care telling me which part of this bill funds abortion?
 
Anybody care telling me which part of this bill funds abortion?

Irrelevant really to the discussion.

Stupak and 11 others believed from their reading of the bill and their aides reading of the Bill that its ambiguity regarding language concerning abortion left open the possability for interpritation by congress or agencies to allow for federal money to go towards abortion services.

To win their votes Obama promised to put forward an Executive Order closing the loophole THEY believe to be there.

THIS THREAD's topic isn't rather or not the Health Care Bill allowed for federal money to go to abortion services, but whether or not Obama will keep his promise that won the votes needed to pass the health care reform or if he'll end up backing out of it now that the votes are cast.

-edited cause it was early and I mixed up politician names-
 
Last edited:
An executive order describing how funds are to be used would be illegal, its solely up to Congress to decide how to spend tax payer dollars. If this healthcare bill has any funds for abortion, Obama would be sneaking into the legislative process by issuing such an Executive order.
 
I have no reason to doubt he will make the executive order. It would be incredibly foolish politically not to.
 
Irrelevant really to the discussion.

Backman and 11 others believed from their reading of the bill and their aides reading of the Bill that its ambiguity regarding language concerning abortion left open the possability for interpritation by congress or agencies to allow for federal money to go towards abortion services.

To win their votes Obama promised to put forward an Executive Order closing the loophole THEY believe to be there.

THIS THREAD's topic isn't rather or not the Health Care Bill allowed for federal money to go to abortion services, but whether or not Obama will keep his promise that won the votes needed to pass the health care reform or if he'll end up backing out of it now that the votes are cast.

So then in other words Obama has to make good on a promise for an issue which there is no justification for other than 'Backman and 11 others' say so. Good to know this isn't a real debate and just Zyphlin supporting claims which have no basis other than 'Backman and 11 others' say so. No. Obama shouldn't have to bend down to the wishes of 12 members of Congress.
 
So then in other words Obama has to make good on a promise for an issue which there is no justification for other than 'Backman and 11 others' say so. Good to know this isn't a real debate and just Zyphlin supporting claims which have no basis other than 'Backman and 11 others' say so. No. Obama shouldn't have to bend down to the wishes of 12 members of Congress.

First, my apologizes, I meant Stupak not Backman.

Second, it seems you think the promises was stupid to make in the first place because he was promising to do something you're suggesting was already prevented in the bill. In which case, if your aim wasn't instead to just come in and derail my thread, you would've focused on Obama's error in making said promise and thus putting himself in the discussion. You know, since hte thread is about the promise and not whether or not abortion is funded by the bill.

Third, this is a debate, based on facts. The fact that Obama promised Stupak and his 11 congressmen that he'd do this executive order, which according to Stupak caused the vote switch. A vote switch mind you that was the difference between passing and not passing. Just because you're pathetically attempting to errect a strawman to take away from the conversation doesn't mean there isn't a conversation. Whether or not abortion services could be funded by this bill is irrelevant save for use in the argument that Obama shouldn't have made the promise in the first case. However, the facts of this manner is that Obama did make said promise and it is that promise we're discussing.

If you'd actually like to discuss your belief as to whether or not Obama will make good on said promise or some other line of reasoning connected directly to him making said promise and potentially keeping it or not, feel free. If you'd like to continue to attempt to derail it through your strawmans then I'd ask you to take it elsewhere.
 
I have no reason to doubt he will make the executive order. It would be incredibly foolish politically not to.

I actually wonder about this and if it would actually be more political advantageous of him to do it. If my memory serves me Stupak and his supposed 11 were from relatively conservative districts to begin with, and I think many were in states Obama carried last election. He has a portion of his base extremely upset with him potentially doing the signing statement. Also, because its being done in a signing statement and not actually inserted into the law its questionable on how concrete it will actaully be, likely winning him little favors from the conservative side as well.

He's painting himself into a damned if you do, damned if you don't corner in the name of getting his health care bill passed. However, I almost think more harm will come to him in doing the signing statement then not doing it.

However, it will be devestating to Stupak and the others that were part of his band. However I imagine they're likely done for either way.
 
I actually wonder about this and if it would actually be more political advantageous of him to do it. If my memory serves me Stupak and his supposed 11 were from relatively conservative districts to begin with, and I think many were in states Obama carried last election. He has a portion of his base extremely upset with him potentially doing the signing statement. Also, because its being done in a signing statement and not actually inserted into the law its questionable on how concrete it will actaully be, likely winning him little favors from the conservative side as well.

He's painting himself into a damned if you do, damned if you don't corner in the name of getting his health care bill passed. However, I almost think more harm will come to him in doing the signing statement then not doing it.

However, it will be devestating to Stupak and the others that were part of his band. However I imagine they're likely done for either way.

I think the number who will be upset with him doing the executive order would be far fewer than those who would be upset if he did not, and for him lying. I am about as pro abortion rights as they come, and I would be highly pissed if he ended up lying on this. I don't think it was necessary to prevent the funding being used for abortions, but when you say you will do something to get people to vote, you damn sure better deliver.
 
Not signing, or later rescinding on the order would be political suicide for him. There is no way he could get reelected after such a slap in the face to pro-lifers (who are not just conservative, but also independents and some dems), there would also be no way of escaping the scale of this particular double cross. No, the Exec order is a done deal, and Obama won't be rescinding it, at least not in his first term, the above reasoning falls apart some considering potential actions of an unconcerned lame duck in his second term - even then it is a huge longshot, one I would never lay money on.

looking even further into the future, it would be completely unthinkable for any Republican Pres to undo, that will never happen sans legislation rendering the order a moot point, and there again would be a slim possibility of some future Dem President possibly unding the exec order under a hailstorm of criticism, and frankly this is just a stupid waste of political capitol if he did so, so very, very unlikely there as well.

This executive order is not as tenuous as people are trying to make it out to be, now as far as efficacy. I do not know, nor will I weigh in on that, since I do not know, and have no dog in this particular race.
 
Last edited:
Stupak, as many on the right have suggested all month long, has waived not based on any definitive change or measure but on a PROMISE (cause Obama or the Senate has never broken one of those) that something would be done. That promise, according to the NYT's:



So my question to everyone is simple. Will Obama actually make good on the promise of this executive order, yes or no?

I voted other. I think those who took his word were fools for doing so. But at the same time if a executive order meant anything Obama would not have needed any of the senators and congressmen to pass the so called health care reform bill and he would have lifted the DADT and all the other **** he promised to do.
 
Stupak, as many on the right have suggested all month long, has waived not based on any definitive change or measure but on a PROMISE (cause Obama or the Senate has never broken one of those) that something would be done. That promise, according to the NYT's:



So my question to everyone is simple. Will Obama actually make good on the promise of this executive order, yes or no?

How can he issue such an executive order if the legislature has it in there that it can be used for such procedure?

I'm getting real sick of the executive orders, they've defacto granted the executive legislative powers; and that's a bad thing.
 
Oh he'll keep his promise. Just only in a secretly snide and vindictive way.
 
Considering he broke his promise of transparency with this bill, I guess it would be only natural for him to not execute the executive order ... :shrug:
 
Yes of course he'll sign it. Basically, it affirms the Hyde amendment.

Section 1. Policy.
Following the recent passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("the Act"), it is necessary to establish an adequate enforcement mechanism to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), consistent with a longstanding Federal statutory restriction that is commonly known as the Hyde Amendment. The purpose of this Executive Order is to establish a comprehensive, government-wide set of policies and procedures to achieve this goal and to make certain that all relevant actors--Federal officials, state officials (including insurance regulators) and health care providers--are aware of their responsibilities, new and old.

The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly-created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. §300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, Pub. L. No. 111-8, §508(d)(1) (2009)) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.​
 
... and we have our answer.
Obama signs executive order on abortion funding limits

By the CNN Wire Staff
March 24, 2010 4:14 p.m. EDT


(CNN) -- President Obama signed an executive order Wednesday that ensures that existing limits on the federal funding of abortion remain in place under the new health care overhaul law.

Unlike the signing of the health care bill into law Tuesday, which was conducted under the glare of media cameras, the event Wednesday was closed to the news media.

It was attended by Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan and 12 of his anti-abortion Democratic House colleagues, without whose help the landmark overhaul bill would not have passed, political observers say.

[...]
 
12 people said "no"? How could Obama possibly back down from his statement to sign an executive order???

Looks like they don't know Obama as well as they think they do.
 
12 people said "no"? How could Obama possibly back down from his statement to sign an executive order???

Looks like they don't know Obama as well as they think they do.
Many persons have a general opinions of politicians: That they rarely do what they say or promise they will.

Additionally, some persons have a belief that this is the case to an even greater degree in the specific instance of Pres. Obama.

Thus...
 
Many persons have a general opinions of politicians: That they rarely do what they say or promise they will.

Additionally, some persons have a belief that this is the case to an even greater degree in the specific instance of Pres. Obama.

Thus...

Making hundreds of campaign promises and not keeping every last one of them is one thing. Making a single promise on an issue as huge as abortion that leaned congressmen's decisions on how to vote and not keeping that promise... that would just be shallow. Obama has more integrity than that.

I love how a 13th person voted "no" even though Obama already signed the executive order.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom