mr. lazarus spoke of, and mr. lazarus, please let me cite you and indicate that i will be using this across the land, the vast lands of this nation. which is a rhetorical waste that this hearing equates, but also to suggest that the reason why this body that professor turley has suggested may be on the verge of some basis of irrelevancy, which i take issue with, is because under the president's house leadership we passed no legislation for the president to be up to implement in the first place. we have not passed immigration reform. we have not held with the question of a mandatory minimum. we have not dealt with a budget process. we've not dealt with sequester. if we would simply do our jobs, the relevance to the american people would exceed our expectations. i just came from the fast for family. just a few hours ago we had in this room dreamers. as far as i'm concerned, the duty of the president is to be the ultimate giver of relief within the context of the constitution and the necessary release of the people wh

mr. lazarus. mr. cannon, welcomed. >> welcome. >> [inaudible] >> open microphone level closer. >> i want to start off by saying that the concerns sharing with you today are not partisanship and it's no secret that i've worked for public and. i myself am not a republican. i am acutely aware of the last publican president's failure to execute the law faithfully. in 20080 i. supported neither party candidate i actually preferred barack obama to his opponent in part because he promised to curb such abuse is by the executive grade i praised him for doing more than any libertarians to celebrate equality and the freedom on the nations for african-americans and gays and lesbians. it commends the president shall take care that the law be faithfully executed. guilty to this duty as it is essential for maintaining the system of governance and public order. the law is a reciprocal between the government. the public order acquires the government to remain faithful to the wall as much as it requires the citizenry t

mr. lazarus does but you and i and mr. lazarus would agree that if the president were trying to tax and borrow and spend 700 billion dollars without congressional authorization, that might be an impeachable offense. >> does anyone think the actions of the bush administration going into iraq without actual knowledge of weapons of mass destruction would have been an impeachable offense? mr. lazarus, you seem to be nodding. -- disregard the nod in front of the curtain. i was upset about that. it was a political decision that congress would have to make. >> the war powers issue does come closest for me for both president obama and president bush. the reason i do not think it rises to that level is because the court decisions have made field so much of a mess. by judicial passivity and not reviewing it, and by the use of historical practice. maintain ano impeachable offense when you have that degree of ambiguity. i do not believe that ambiguity is found in the constitution. i believe the president obama violated the constitution

mr. lazarus, welcome. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman.thank you all members of the committee who are here. i have to disagree with my on the panel who have spoken so far. brandishing the take care clause become a favored talking of an arrayponents of obama administration policies and actions. efforts, or at least the ones with which i am reality -- alln these efforts to import the constitution into what are in reality political and policy attacks, are really rhetorical. they mocked the text and original meaning of the take care clause. flout supreme court president and they contradict the existing practice of all presidencies, republican implementat to regulatory programs. critics fault the obama things,ration for many but essentially, two kinds of things. one, making necessary adjustments in timing of laws,entation of particularly the affordable care act. second, in matching immigration and enforcement priorities with resources and practical humanitarian and other exigencies. exercising presidential judgment for such reasons is precisely

mr. lazarus does. i know that you and i and mr. lazarus would all agree that a president were trying to tax and borrow and spend them hundred billion dollars without authorization tha that may be impeachable. >> does anybody think that the actions of going into iraq without actual knowledge of weapons of mass destruction or anything else would have been an impeachable offense? esther lazarus, you seem to be nodding. >> this regard the nod. i was very upset about that whether it is an impeachable and the decision congress would have to make. mr. turley? >> the issue does come closest for both president obama and president bush created the reason i do not think that it rises to that level is because iof the court's decisions they have made this feel like such of a mass. first of all, by the judicial and then not reviewing it it's very hard to maintain the offense when you have that degree of ambiguity. i do not belief that ambiguity is in the constitution. i believe the president obama violated the constitution of libya, for example.

lazarus? >> aye. >> honda. aye. >> the vote is 5-0 and the jurisdiction is granted and mr. mariano has a five day appeal period which ends next month to file this appeal. >> thank you, we will call item 4 b, which is two rehearing requests, subject property at 605, 811, and 840 gon sal les drive.letter from julian lagos, appellant, requesting rehearing of appeal nos. 13-130/131/132, lagos vs. dpw buf, decided nov. 20, 2013. at that time, the board voted 5-0 to uphold all three permits on the basis they are code compliant. permit holder: parkmerced llc. project, 1st permit: removal of one (1) tree with replanting of three (3) trees of similar canopy and of largest size available; order no. 181658. project, 2nd permit: removal of one (1) tree with re-planting of three (3) trees of similar canopy and of largest size available; order no. 181659. project, 3rd permit: removal of one (1) tree with re-planting of three (3) trees of similar canopy and of largest size available; order no. 181660 >> mr. lagos, you have nine minutes to present your request. >> thank you, director golds

mr. pacheco if you can call the roll, please. >> the clerk: we have a motion from the president to adopt the november 20th, 2013, minutes on that motion, commissioner fung? >> aye. >> commissioner hurtado? aye. lazarus aye. >> we are going to call no. 7 out of order. item 7: 77 appeal no. 13-135 michael shaffer & richard tsai, appellanttss vs. dept. of building inspection, respondent planning dept. approval 801 & 803 kansas street. protesting the issuance on october 09, 2013, to chris cobb, alteration permit repair/replace existing stairway and porch at rear of building; new decking for required means of egress; add firewall; provide new support footings to porch and stairway; comply with nov no. 200996781 and 2007909733. application no. 2012/10/30/3118. for hearing today.>> we are going to call no. 7 out of order. sf 71234 commissioners, i understand the parties have reached an agreement and i would ask that they come up to speak. if someone is here on behalf of the appellant, they should come forward as well. >> we have reached an agreement on a new plan and the plan is consistent with the plan we submitted as an exhibit to our papers. we've been informed that the drawings we have there are not su

mr. lazarus has written articles that appeared in journals as well as publications such as the atlantic, the "washington post" and the new republic. our final witness is michael cannon of the health policy studies. he has been recognized as an influential expert on the affordable care act. mr. cannon has appeared on abc, cbs, cnn and fox news and has written articles that have been featured in numerous newspapers including "the wall street journal," usa today and the "los angeles times." he is also the coeditor of a book on replacing the portable care act and the co-author of a book on healthcare reform. i would like to thank all of the witnesses today. each of the written statements will be entered into the record in its entirety and i ask that each witness summarized his or her summary in five minutes or less to stay within the timeframe there is a timing light on your table. when the light switches from green to yellow, you will have one minute to conclude your testimony. when the light turns red if signals that the five minutes have expired and we will turn first to professor turley.