White House may have skirted federal law to try and save its failing health care bill

[Mr. Sparkle]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by DonViejo (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Thinkprogress.org

Several official Twitter accounts lobbied Congress in support of the AHCA bill.

On Thursday morning, as the Trump administration frantically tried to save its deeply unpopular Affordable Care Act replacement bill, White House social media director Dan Scavino Jr. tweeted out a message to Trump’s dwindling pool of supporters urging them to call their congressperson in support of the American Health Care Act. Hours later, similarly worded tweets were sent from the official @POTUS account and Donald Trump’s personal account.

But as some people were quick to note, directly lobbying Congress in support of (or opposition to) a bill using federal dollars—including White House staff who earn federal salaries—is strictly forbidden under 18 U.S.C. § 1913.

Read more: https://thinkprogress.org/white-house-ignores-anti-lobbying-law-in-desperate-attempt-to-save-its-health-care-bill-80eeb6d9c19f#.nb2bkjrje

[dchill]

1. Haven't you heard? The Supreme Court says...

Money is speech! The more you have, the freer you are.

[underpants]

3. Money is speech! The more you have, the freer you are.

[dchill]

4. It's not a lie if they believe it!

[groundloop]

2. But what's the penalty. With a repuke Congress there is no penalty...

This shit might as well be legal if nobody's going to do anything about it. 45* doesn't give a crap about rules or laws, they're for little people.

[Augiedog]

5. TRump may have violated a law? NO! Say it ain't so. He would NEVER behave so foolishly!

[randome]

6. I don't get it. How is it 'directly lobbying Congress' to communicate with supporters?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Javaman]

7. here you go...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1913

No part of the money appropriated by any enactment of Congress shall, in the absence of express authorization by Congress, be used directly or indirectly to pay for any personal service, advertisement, telegram, telephone, letter, printed or written matter, or other device, intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress, a jurisdiction, or an official of any government, to favor, adopt, or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation, whether before or after the introduction of any bill, measure, or resolution proposing such legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriation; but this shall not prevent officers or employees of the United States or of its departments or agencies from communicating to any such Member or official, at his request, or to Congress or such official, through the proper official channels, requests for any legislation, law, ratification, policy, or appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient conduct of the public business, or from making any communication whose prohibition by this section might, in the opinion of the Attorney General, violate the Constitution or interfere with the conduct of foreign policy, counter-intelligence, intelligence, or national security activities. Violations of this section shall constitute violations of section 1352(a) of title 31.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 792; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147; Pub. L. 107–273, div. A, title II, § 205(b), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1778.)

[groundloop]

11. But it doesn't say you can't tweet !!!

(just in case )

[msanthrope]

8. No.... it's the executive branch calling on people to directly lobby the Congress

In support of proposed Federal expenditures.... it's a No-No... It's like telling people to go call the judge's Chambers because the executive branch wants a favorable decision at the Supreme Court.

In effect... You can't use the resources of the executive branch to go harass the Congress for legislation you want.

[fleur-de-lisa]

9. Ethics went out the window the minute these thugs assumed power. n/t

[KingCharlemagne]

10. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guardians?) - nt

[DonViejo]

12. Locking...

A consensus of Forum Hosts agrees this is an opinion and analysis piece, not permitted in the LBN Forum. Hosts encourage you to post this news article in the Editorials and Other Articles Forum.