OT (Sorta) Response to executive orders.greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
I actually consider this post On Topic due to the fact that anyone who has stored consumables against shortages could be labaled a "Hoarder". And "hoarding" has been addressed in executive orders. It's odd that "hoarders" would be denounced and their "hoards" seized because the governement didn't see the need to create a reserve of supplies and individuals did. Other executive orders cover things like what kinds of money we can have and how much privacy we retain.
Anyway, call your congress critter and ask that they support this initiative.
Executive Orders Meet Separation of Powers Act By Ben Anderson CNS Staff Writer 22 October, 1999
(CNSNews.com) - In the wake of President Bill Clinton's numerous executive orders, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) has introduced legislation to preserve the separation of powers between Congress and the presidency.
The Separation of Powers Restoration Act would allow for lawsuits against the president and administration for orders believed to violate or harm individual rights. It also voids many of the "national emergencies" which have been on the books since the 1970s and re-delegates "national emergency" authorization powers solely to Congress.
The legislation will get its first public hearing before the House Judiciary Committee next Thursday
In an op-ed piece published earlier this year, Paul compared Clinton's use of executive orders to the proclamations and edicts prescribed by King George.
"One of the chief complaints of the American colonists against King George was that he had usurped powers that were not rightfully his, and then used those powers to the disadvantage of the people," Paul said.
"The most glaring example of our out-of-balance system is the power of the president to create laws through the use of the 'Executive Order.' Our system grants all legislative power to the legislative branch, while Chief Executive exists to "faithfully execute" those laws," Paul added.
Clinton has often been criticized for many of his executive orders. Among them is Presidential Decision Directive 25, which allows the US military to be mobilized under UN command without congressional approval.
Executive Order 12919 directs the president's cabinet to control all aspects of the economy during a declared state of emergency, effectively putting the entire country under the control of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The US is currently under 14 states of emergency.
Clinton issued another executive order titled "Working Group on Unlawful Conduct on the Internet" on August 7, 1999. Members of this group include the attorney general, treasury secretary, FBI director, DEA administrator, FDA commissioner, BATF director, the secretary of commerce and education and other federal officials deemed appropriate by the U.S. attorney general.
-- eyes_open (email@example.com), October 22, 1999
After the dust settles and history is being written and/or re-written, we will probably find that the U.S. has been under a secret E.O. or something very similar, since at least December 1998.
That could explain the media's position and the current atmosphere of silence in some circles.
As to the legitimacy of eo's, I believe the Congress can cancel an eo within sixty days of its being published in the Federal Register. Otherwise, it becomes quasi-law or whatever it becomes at the end of sixty days.
I believe the constitutional test of the legitimacy of eo's is incomplete and should have been satisfied long ago. They are not universally accepted as law, although in some quarters they are accepted as law, such as in the handling of "secret" documents, etc.
-- no talking please (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 22, 1999.
No Talking, your theories are of some interest, and I would agree with you that we are under secret executive orders now. However, they are called Presidential Decision Directives and the only way to get a glimpse of the content of these PDDs are to use the FOIA, as they are not detailed in the Federal Register.
I do not, however, agree with you on an executive order on a media blackout and silence among 'certain circles' regarding y2k. Scrutinizing a list of Bilderberger attendees would clarify the media question and if your certain circles pertains to big business, look to the 'bottom line' for your answers.
The normal executive orders become 'de-facto law' in 30 days if un- contested.
Executive orders have been argued in court many times, however only two have been overturned. Our judicial system is not necessarily following constitutional law, as we are commonly seeing these days. Executive orders are accepted as law until they are contested, either through the judicial system, or through the barrel of a gun. But, then that is why we were given the 2nd amendment in the first place. To defend against tyranny.
To all: Welcome to the new way.
-- OR (email@example.com), October 22, 1999.