Lake Erie Conservative

thoughtful discussion(s) about issue(s)

Posts Tagged ‘legal authority’

… The Internet is not a Public Utility [#net neutrality]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Monday,December 19th,2016

.. and Net Neutrality is unconstitutional …

.. [h/t — TruthRevolt.org]..
.. [link] to the blog news …

Advertisements

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… What are They Thinking ?!?! [#Operation Choke Point]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Thursday,November 10th,2016

.. I am sorry that I did not know what Operation Choke Point was , before .

.. I do now .

.. It is unquestionably illegal , an illegal use of congressionally appropriated funds for which there is no moral or legitimate purpose . People who run legal businesses have a right to do business , without hindrance . Banks and other financial institutions may choose to or not to do business with them . They have the right to choose to enter or exit areas of business that they find tasteful . If they find them distasteful , then they will not do so . But , it is their choice …

.. [h/t — Newsmax]..
.. [link] to the news story ..

.. Governments have at their discretion a great deal of power . They should use it responsiby and carefully . It is not the province of the government , however , to grossly misuse its law enforcement and regulatory powers to harass , intimidate , and / or penalize them . They have a right to do business with whom they choose . They do not have a right to put them out of business by indirectly targeting them by their financial intermediaries [the banks / s&ls , etc]. It is not just unfair , it is illegal and unconstitutional …

Posted in financial opinion, fraud, legal info, legal strategy, personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… The F.D.A. is Going to Have a Problem with This [#ECig][#FDA][#regulation]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Wednesday,May 11th,2016

.. yes , the F.D.A. [the Food and Drug Administration] has gained a lot of power . They would still like to have more . In particular , they want to make a powergrab about ecigarettes and ecigars ..

.. they are going to have a slight problem . Both cigarettes and e – cigs are nicotine delivery devices . That is not the basis , though , of the F.D.A. ‘s ability to regulate the latter . They have a different basis ..

.. Tobacco …. oops !! ..

.. [h/t — Newsmax.com]..
.. [link] to the blog post ..

.. so the F.D.A. is going to face strong legal challenge in court over this power grab . These dummies have forgot one fundamental truth in U.S. government : A US Government agency may not regulate something without the legal authority to do so ..

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… The Iran Nuclear Sanctions are an Act of Congress [#a law]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Tuesday,March 15th,2016

.. so , His Lordship has only limited to no authority to waive them …

.. many areas of foreign policy are the exclusive province of the POTUS . Congress does have some role , but it is circumscribed pretty heavily by the Constitution ..

.. [h/t — NYSlimes.com]..
.. [link] to the news article …

.. in this case , Congress has acted . It has enacted economic sanctions against Iran into law . There is normally a little bit of wiggle room for POTUS to waive those sanctions . That power is usually written into the law . Otherwise , no , it cannot be done …

.. So , if POTUS wants to reduce or eliminate the Iran sanctions , forget it . There is no moral or political support in Congress for the move . He might get some maneuvering room , but not much else other than that …

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… the ACLJ has the Best Chance to Get at the Truth [#IRSgate EMails]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Friday,July 25th,2014

.. boy , you can bet that the Sekulows [father & son] are pissed about this …

.. if anyone understands what can be done , and how to do it , they do .

.. [h/t — townhall.com/tipsheet(katiepavlich)]..
.. [link] to the news story …

.. they have the ripest casest [election law expert Cleta Mitchell has many of the others] and will be in hot pursuit of this …

.. normally , one cannot use a civil case to pursue an independent counsel . But this is no ordinary case . The A.C.L.J. should have an angle and an avenue to pursue the court to force the appointment of an independent counsel , via a writ of mandamus [writ of ” I demand ” ]. The Department of injustice has mountains of evidence that clearly meet the standard . Now this …

.. this case should meet that standard all by itself . Then , watch the ObamaCraps squirm when they try to fight it …

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… This One could get Interesting [Supreme Court case // IRS powers]…

Posted by paulfromwloh on Sunday,May 11th,2014

.. this one is not about a request for information .

.. this one comes in the normal course of doing business , including in the performance of an audit or an examination . It is done all of the time …

.. what it is about is the next step in the process , a summons . This one carries legal teeth . In effect , it is a subpoena . It carries the same effects as one . These are usually approved by courts as a matter of course …

.. The Infernal Revenue Service is not used to people balking at summons . Those ” hush puppies ” have teeth . But , they can be challenged .

.. [h/t — TAS]..
.. [link] to the blog news ..

.. this one is about a taxpayer challenging the legality and authority of an IRS summons . I am guessing that the Service is plenty surprised by this . But , the taxpayer is right , in this case . the Service has to have legal authority for the summons ..

.. when a taxpayer decides to due this (go to war with theService) , they are getting themselves a world of trouble . I am presuming that this fellow has a tax lawyer , and , in addition , a good appeals lawyer , to boot . But , they should be darned sure of their position , If they are , then go to it . The Service has to have a legal basis for what it is doing .

Posted in constitutional opinion, legal info, legal opinion, personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Watch the AG make an Ass of Himself …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Wednesday,February 26th,2014

.. there was an oversight hearing , recently , for the Department of InJustice .

.. Well , one would think that the Attorney General would have been better prepared . Well , one would be wrong . He bombed , royally …

.. Senator Mike Lee [R-Ut] had AG Holder on the hot seat . Well , to put it honestly , Holder got burned . He made a fool of himself . If he cannot product the legal reasoning for POTUS ‘ executive actions , or the memos , then he should quit , today …

.. [h/t — YouTube]..
.. [link] to the oversight hearing footage ..

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Extending the Risk Corridors [ObamaCrapCare] …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Monday,February 24th,2014

.. this one is the insurer bailout provision ,folks .

.. it seems that His Lordship wants to extend it beyond 2016 …

.. with what controlling legal authority one might ask . The risk corridors program expires at the end of 2016 . So that is that …. or with this crowd , is it ? …

.. from HotAir [Allahpundit] …

White House weighing plan to extend ObamaCare’s “risk corridor,” i.e. bailout, program beyond 2016?

posted at 4:41 pm on February 18, 2014 by Allahpundit

The program’s supposed to be transitional, sunsetting in 2016 after the new exchanges have had a few years to launch and then stabilize.

Emphasis on “supposed to be.”

Industry insiders told the Washington Examiner a plan to extend the Affordable Care Act’s “risk corridors” are under discussion, but that administration officials have not made a final decision…

The Obama Administration is now weighing a plan to grant an additional three-year extension for non-complaint plans on the individual market. Such a move would prevent millions of people from losing their policies in the critical weeks and months before the 2014 election.

But it would also allow people on the individual market to keep non-compliant plans beyond the risk corridor’s 2016 expiration date, leaving health insurance companies serving the exchange vulnerable to financial losses as the more healthy customers continue to stay out of the exchanges.

Health insurance companies are looking for something in exchange for the three-year extension, which will make it much harder for them to sign up healthier and younger customers. Extending the risk corridor program is part of that conversation with the White House, industry sources said.

Remember back in November when Obama was eating truckloads of crap for breaking his “if you like your plan” promise? His solution was to let insurers “un-cancel” canceled plans — but lost in the hubbub at the time was the fact that he said he’d allow it for just one year. The obvious problem with that timeline is that it means this issue will bubble up again this fall, just in time for the midterms. New solution, then: Quietly allow insurers to keep un-canceled plans in effect past the midterms, for another three years. That’s how Obama just “solved” his little electoral problem with the employer mandate, isn’t it? Three-year extensions across the board, to minimize the damage to Democrats from his pet boondoggle in November. The problem is, because the old un-canceled plans are typically cheaper than expensive new “comprehensive” ObamaCare exchange plans, the extension means insurers are suddenly looking at less revenue than they counted on all the way through 2017. That’s where the “risk corridors” come in. Assuming the Examiner’s report is true, the White House is going to make this worth the industry’s while by extending the timeline for the bailout program too. Any losses they suffer in 2017 would, presumably, be partly offset by Uncle Sam even though the “risk corridor” is supposed to have terminated by then. Your tax dollars will buy insurers’ complicity in yet another illegal extension.

Bob Laszewski kinda sorta saw this coming, by the way. Last month he published a post arguing that, for all its faults, ObamaCare won’t cause a death spiral in the insurance industry anytime soon. The reason: The “risk corridor” program. Since Uncle Sam’s on the hook for any heavy losses in the industry, insurers are under no immediate pressure to raise premiums, the potential trigger of a death spiral. They can keep premiums artificially low — at least for a few years, until the “risk corridor” sunsets. Laszewski figured insurers would give the White House one more chance next year to get their act together on implementation and to start signing up the uninsured en masse; if they failed, he said, he expected companies to start parachuting out of the exchanges in 2016 before the “risk corridor” program expires. Which is to say, it’s very much in the White House’s interest to keep the program in effect, if it can, to keep insurers from abandoning the exchanges, especially if HHS has reason to think the risk pools they’re projecting will be less young and healthy than they had hoped. (And they do have such a reason at the moment.) The last thing Democrats need in a presidential election year is “Insurers give up on ObamaCare” headlines. Promise them some more sugar and you can avoid that. Maybe.

It seems naive at this point to ask whether the White House could extend the “risk corridor” unilaterally or whether that would be illegal. If they want to do it, they’ll do it regardless. O’s theory in issuing periodic delays or extensions for ObamaCare’s provisions is that, during the law’s transitional phase, he has some latitude legally to tweak implementation to make it go more smoothly. Extending the “risk corridors” past 2016, though, would mean the “transitional” phase had lasted past the end of his own presidency. It’s dubious, but it’s also in character. Here’s a question, though: Why would insurers leak this info now, when Marco Rubio’s trying to build support within the GOP for a bill to repeal the “risk corridor” program? He’s had little luck getting it on the leadership’s radar but his luck could change now that rumors are swirling that the bailout provisions might be extended into 2017 and beyond. The recent CBO numbers that found that the “risk corridor” could actually make money for taxpayers is a problem for the GOP, but (a) CBO’s numbers can be challenged and (b) CBO assumed that the “risk corridor” would be gone by 2016. Even if O decides to unilaterally extend the program, a new Republican Senate next year could join forces with some red-state Dems and Boehner’s House majority to repeal it, forcing Obama to either acquiesce in the repeal or to veto it and be seen as singlehandedly defending indefinite bailouts for insurers. Very strange that insurance industry sources, who stand to benefit, would be blabbing about this now.

… from the Washington Examiner [Susan Ferrechio] …

Obamacare changes may include extension of risk corridors

 Susan Ferrechio                             | FEBRUARY 17, 2014 AT 5:18 AM

The Obama Administration may extend beyond 2016 a federal reimbursement program for health insurance companies that lose money by participating in the newly created health care exchanges.

Industry insiders told the Washington Examiner a plan to extend the Affordable Care Act’s “risk corridors” are under discussion, but that administration officials have not made a final decision.

The risk corridor program was written into the 2,700-page health care bill to help the insurance companies offset losses if they enroll too few healthy customers and sign up too many people with high health care costs.

Risk corridors are aimed at keeping premiums from skyrocketing by requiring the government to “share in the risk associated with the new marketplace,” according to the health care lobbying group America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP).

Insurance companies pay into a pool to cover losses for companies that fare poorly but the federal government must step in if there is widespread loss, which some say could happen due to the lack of participation on the health care exchanges from young and healthy individuals.

The program, however is only meant to be short term, AHIP said, to “ease the transition between the old and new marketplace.”

But the disastrous rollout of the law resulted in millions of people on the individual market losing health care policies that did not include the “essential benefits” required under the new health care law, including maternity care and pediatric dentistry. The resulting public outcry prompted President Obama on Nov. 14 to announce that health insurance companies could allow customers to keep their old plans for an extra year.

The Obama Administration is now weighing a plan to grant an additional three-year extension for non-complaint plans on the individual market. Such a move would prevent millions of people from losing their policies in the critical weeks and months before the 2014 election.

But it would also allow people on the individual market to keep non-compliant plans beyond the risk corridor’s 2016 expiration date, leaving health insurance companies serving the exchange vulnerable to financial losses as the more healthy customers continue to stay out of the exchanges.

Health insurance companies are looking for something in exchange for the three-year extension, which will make it much harder for them to sign up healthier and younger customers. Extending the risk corridor program is part of that conversation with the White House, industry sources said.

“If the extension increases adverse selection, premiums will go up and taxpayers will be on the hook for more money through extending the risk corridors,” Mike Tanner, a health care policy scholar at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, said. “The question is, how much? And I don’t think anybody knows because I don’t think anybody knows how many people we are talking about.”

John C. Goodman, the president and CEO of The National Center for Policy Analysis, believes insurance companies participating on the exchanges are headed for significant losses as the sickest and most medically vulnerable get dumped into the exchanges and waivers and delays are granted to the healthy.

In Detroit, for example, city officials are considering pushing onto the health care exchanges municipal retirees who are too young to qualify for Medicare.

“I can understand why they are talking about extending the risk corridors because I think the losses are going to be quite large,” Goodman said.

Health care law supporters point out that the federal government can make money off risk corridor programs. A Congressional Budget Office report last week predicted the federal government won’t lose a dime through the risk corridor program but will end up netting $8 billion.

The CBO based its estimate on the performance of risk corridors established under the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit program passed by a Republican-led Congress and signed into law by President Bush in 2003.

“The risk corridor program was a good idea during the Bush administration, and it worked,” Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said during a recent hearing on the program. “Rather than a bailout for insurance companies, the program has resulted in $7 billion in net gains to taxpayers. But now since these same mechanisms are part of the Affordable Care Act, Republicans argue that they are a bailout for insurance companies.”

Critics in and out of Congress want legislation to repeal the risk corridors and warn that Obamacare won’t yield the same kind of results as Medicare Part D because of the much larger size and scope of the new health care law and the potential for a much larger pool of sick and unhealthy on the exchanges.

“Medicare Part D made money, but I don’t think that’s going to be true here,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the former director of the Congressional Budget Office who now runs American Action Forum, which describes itself as a center-right policy institute.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. has introduced legislation to repeal the risk corridor provision in the health care law, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has no plans to take up the bill.

… LEC here again — no controlling legal authority …

Posted in accountability, congressional oversight, constitutional opinion, fraud, illegality, legal opinion, legal strategy, personal opinion, political strategy | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »