Contact FreedomWorks

111 K Street NE
Suite 600
Washington, DC 20002

  • Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
  • Local 202.783.3870


Bypassing Congress, Obama's Bureaucrats are Promulgating Coercive and Costly Rules

Democracy and Power 101: Government is Power

The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.
—James Madison, Speech in the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830


Bypassing Congress, Obama's Bureaucrats are Promulgating Coercive and Costly Rules

With three years remaining as president, Barrack Obama has lost a significant amount of public respect and admiration during his term.  His political power has been reduced, and the House of Representatives is controlled, and will mostly likely continue to be controlled, by Republicans.  

Most likely, Republicans will continue to gain seats in the Senate.  So, our President knows he lacks the power to properly promulfate new laws impacting climate change, education, transportation, nutrition, microwaves, minimum wage and almost every other aspect of American life.  He boasted in his State of the Union speech he intends to “bypass Congress.” 

 Politico reports on the new and coercive rules made by bureaucrats.  The Obama administration uses and controls Federal government, financial grants to manipulate everything from abortions to welfare.  The combination of financial manipulations and the rules are expensive, and ultimately impacts every American.  Most of these bureaucratic decisions will impede economic advancement in America.  Below is a partial list of bureaucratic rules impacting Americans:

  • limiting trans-fat in snack foods
  • reducing sulfur content in gasoline
  • improving efficiency standards for trucks
  • cutting carbon emissions to stop global warning
  • creating green energy grants, e.g., Solyndra and solar farms in the Mojave Desert
  • restricting for profit higher education and community colleges based on students ability to payoff student loans

  • regulating placement of k-12 teachers
  • rewarding “livability” transportation routes in cities
  • banking for legal marijuana vendors
  • calorie counts on vending machines
  • wood stoves
  • smokeless tobacco
  • salt content fo potato chips
  • minimum wage
  • political activity of non-profit organizations
Politico reports:


According to the administration's own estimates, last year alone Obama-era regulations added 158 million hours of reporting requirements – very costly.  The American Action Forum claims the last five years of new regulations cost nearly $500 billion – the size of Sweden's gross domestic product.

Of course, this violates our Constitutional order.  Most important, the stealth abuse of bureaucratic power deprives Americans of participating in an honest and complete discussion of the issues.  Very harmfully, President Obama and his vast bureaucracy do not respect the honor of our Constitution.   


Nocturnal Ma's picture
Nocturnal Ma

First stone stone wonders “if some of those who seem to abide by the Tea Party realize that it’s this very movement (actually it’s nothing more than an Astroturf organization) is in turn fracturing the GOP?”

Astroturf organization? I assume you are using it as a euphemism that somehow the Tea Party is a disguise to look like a grassroots citizen movement. Progressives still don’t understand what has made the Tea Party what it is today.

There are groups trying to say they are part of some national Tea Party organization, but in no way do any of these self-anointed national groups control or dictate to the individual Tea Parties what to do or say. Each local Tea Party is independent from other groups, but is connected by commonsense principles.

Second stone stone, who is apparently a stoner (sorry couldn’t help myself), proclaims “The GOP's stance on immigration has turned the single largest growing segment of the population off of the GOP and as seen in not only 2008 but 2012 as well it was this shift in demographics that won Obama both terms.”

Opps, how come the GOP cleaned the Dems clock in 2010 with one of the biggest shellackings the Democrat Party has had in a long time? And, I would add, it was the Tea Party movement that swept the GOP into power.

Polling data indicates Republican voters, mostly conservatives, dissatisfied with the Republican Party's rejection of conservatism, that showed up in 2010 stayed home in 2012, and that is illustrative of the problem the Republican Party faces not a shift in demographics.

The Republican Party trying to push itself away from its conservative base and the Tea Party, who are regular Americans from all walks of life on a number of issues is the problem. Tea Party members, who are regular Americans from all walks of life, are "demonized” because they don't appreciate Washington politics and they can't be controlled by the establishment politicians.

Lastly stone stone boasts “But in reality all this (what he pontificates) has caused is disruption in politics with less actually getting done in the name of unrealistic ideology.”
Well stone stone! “Unrealistic ideology” is liberal/progressive political crusaders out to change the world to fit their own vision. When the world fails to conform to their vision, then it seems obvious to you and these ideologues that it is the world that is wrong, not that their vision is uninformed or unrealistic.
The political consequence of such attitudes - reaffirmed, to great applause from the machinators on the left- is the current lofty rhetoric and heady visions of a headstrong dogmatic president bloviating more like a third-world dictator than a U.S. president.

Instead of faithfully executing the laws as required by his oath to the U.S. Constitution; he avows - if lawmakers do not promptly keel to the lefts “unrealistic ideology” radical agenda- he will foist on the nation via a coup of the Constitution, the ultimate “fundamental transformation” of the nation by decree or regulatory fiat.

Edwin Loftus

Obama's threats and actions violating the separation of powers within the federal government are certainly an anti-Constitutional attack. The effort to use federal regulation to impose rules upon the domestic affairs of Americans is an anti-Constitutional attack. --- But only a little less of an attack upon the Constitution is the allegedly "conservative" effort to sustain federal authority over domestic affairs, while making it less intrusive and less extensive. --- The "separation of powers" in the federal government was not the system the Founders created. That already existed in Great Britain with its executive in the combination of King and Prime Minister, its bi-cameral legislature in the Houses of Parliament and of the Lords and an increasingly independent Judiciary based on "rule of written law" and known "Common Law". --- The true "separation of powers" our Founders created was the division of authority in which each state had domestic authority over its own territory while the federal government was limited to foreign affairs, trade, national security, issues between the states and the citizens of one state with another or their citizens, and ensuring those basic rights and limitations "enumerated/delegated" to it in the Constitution. This "system of two governments" ensured that no central authority had power over the lives of Americans while no state could deny its citizen's basic rights or establish a system not consistent with a democratic-republic. --- None of the so-called "conservative" leaders of today are explaining this true fundamental of American freedom or raising it as an issue. The true division in our "divided government" has almost no advocates with a voice that reaches the nation. --- Look up the "Roundheads", the "New Army" and Oliver Cromwell, their leader. In the early 17th Century they carried out a revolution that overthrew the King (Charles the 1st) and led to his execution. But they did not institute a liberation of the people from theocratic and political dictatorship as they had promised each other and their supporters. Instead they replaced the tyranny of the King and the Episcopal Church with the tyranny of a "Lord High Protector" and the Puritan sect. They replaced dictatorship by one faction with dictatorship by a different faction and their revolution failed. --- No true Constitutional Conservative should want to replace the federal tyranny of the Democrats with a federal tyranny of the Republicans or the federal tyranny of the "liberals" with the federal tyranny of the "conservatives". Our system of state authority over its domestic affairs accommodated the differences between pro and anti-slavery factions. It can certainly accommodate the differences between "liberal" and "conservative" factions, each dominating in the states where they are dominant, while the states that are more evenly balanced watch to see which approach works best. --- Under the original Constitution, the faction that dominates the federal government is checked by the power of other factions to dominate in different branches of federal government and oppose them. But no matter which faction dominates the federal government or how thoroughly they dominate it, they have little effect on the lives of the people because they are governed, not by the federal government, but by their own state governments and if they do not like that government, they can move to one they like better. --- All who seek to dominate American's lives with the policies of their faction by making and keeping the federal government the dominant authority in domestic politics are traitors to the people and their Constitution, be they Democrats or Republicans.

stonestone's picture
stone stone

Interesting about your "Most Likely" comments. Interesting because in reality the GOP is in the worst position its probably been in several generations. First of all, the party decided for way too long to go after a socially conservative base whom are heavily concentrated in a select few sections of the country. This base was at one time large enough to be readily counted upon to win elections. All GOP candidates had to do was pretend we were still in the 50's, talk social agendas and unrealistic financial goals to this base and win. So much has changed in just a few short years. Because the GOP chose to go down that path they inadvertently also ignored the demographic that consists of immigrants, people in major metropolitan areas, and so on. The GOP's stance on immigration has turned the single largest growing segment of the population off of the GOP and as seen in not only 2008 but 2012 as well it was this shift in demographics that won Obama both terms. At this point even if 100% of the base votes for GOP candidates that is no longer enough. The trend will continue. Seeing as how the GOP has changed none of their rhetoric, its more likely the GOP will lose seats in both the house and senate. Lastly, and I wonder if some of those who seem to abide by the Tea Party realize that its this very movement ( actually its nothing more than an astroturf organization) is in turn fracturing the GOP? I ask because that's precisely what's happening with the Tea Party again and again asking for unrealistic, and in some cases outrageous things while also choosing candidates who have only a limited appeal to the most conservative of the conservative base. And as such the GOP cannot speak with a single unified voice nor can they really proclaim a purpose anymore. They are split down the middle. I suppose as a Democrat I should be giddy with glee that this is happening. But in reality all this has caused is disruption in politics with less actually getting done in the name of unrealistic ideology. What will inevitably happen is the GOP will be forced to become more moderate and more reasonable ( maybe going back as far as the Reagan era ). The sooner they do so, the better for the rest of us

D Williams

If we get some true conservatives in there, it will be even better. Texans, I have a GOOD ONE that needs to be there. Dwayne Stovall (texansforstovall (dot) com) for US Senate. Go there and find out who he is and I am sure you will support him.