Right before its summer recess, the House voted (225 to 201) to authorize the chamber to sue the President for his failure to faithfully execute the laws, specifically his many suspensions and unilateral re-writes of the Obamacare law.
While there are many serious legal issues raised by the proposed House lawsuit, PLF’s Todd Gaziano makes the case in a National Review Online exclusive, that most of the arguments being pushed against the lawsuit are seriously misguided.
[Tweet “Myth 8: Obamacare lawsuit is a huge waste of money since the suit is just a political stunt.”]
Myth 8: It’s a huge waste of money since the suit is just a political stunt. The amount of money involved is infinitesimal compared with the economic impacts of the ObamaCare law at issue or the value of constitutional government generally. The legal expenses will probably be less than 1/1000th of the Legislative Branch appropriation, which total is less than 1/1000th of that executive branch agencies spend. As for whether the proposed lawsuit is a “political stunt,” that is more of an epithet than an analytical term. That same term could be used for any action (or any repeal bill) that is unlikely to be adopted by the U.S. Senate and signed into law. The odds of the proposed lawsuit prevailing are far from assured, but they may still be worth pursuing given that no other strategy is guaranteed either.
During the debate, Todd’s piece “Top Ten Myths about the House’s Proposed Suit Against Obama” was met with agreement from think tank and academic leaders far and wide, including such notables as Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit, Andrew Grossman of the Cato Institute, Elizabeth Slattery of The Heritage Foundation, Professor Elizabeth Price Foley and Professor Josh Blackman. But the highlight would come from Speaker John Boehner tweeting and retweeting to his audience of more than 650K followers.
Many think that there is much more to be added to this debate. What do you think? Tweet Todd your thoughts @ToddGaziano.