Checks and balances seem to be at the heart of both lawsuits. In terms of Boehner’s lawsuit, I would argue that his lawsuit is merely a tantrum aimed against a President that has made him and his fellow republicans look bad because our President was forced to do many things by executive order since the Republican Party has ruled by obstruction. If Boehner and his republican colleagues had tried to help govern instead of only impeding governance, then the Affordable Care Act could have been tweaked and massaged into emerging as a stronger, and more coherent law. Since the Republican Party abdicated their responsibilities, the President was forced to engage in executive action to make the law workable for everyone out there, individuals and small business. I see Boehner’s lawsuit as a tantrum because his plan to derail the Affordable Care Act did not go as planned and this law will be seen, later on in history, as another victory for the Democratic Party alongside Social Security and Medicare. That cannot sit well with the republican leadership, what have they given the American people as a legacy? Regarding the lawsuit against Governor Perry, I believe that his case involves a veto and denying funding for an independent corruption investigative unit that is headed by a democrat, who incidentally was found guilty of a D.U.I, she has paid the price for her crime and is back to work, but that is neither here nor there, nonetheless a grand jury has found enough to indict Governor Perry of abuse of his authority, so the question for both is how far do checks and balances get to go and is it too far, in that it can impede proper executive action? It will be interesting to watch these lawsuits unfold, unfortunately for us the people, these may take a life of their own and distract all concerned parties from their actual jobs of legislating and governance. We always lose out when one party is seeking to undermine the other.
read the article: