Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For the record-- it wasn't a "Muslim ban"-- it was a ban on travel from certain countries known to be safe harbors & sources of terrorist activity....Most, but not all, of those countries happened to be Muslim majority.
Among the few enumerated powers & responsibilities of The President is to be in charge of foreign policy. That particular action was exactly what executive orders were meant to entail.
Consider Obama's ill conceived "Iran Deal." Call it what you like, but by any name, it was a foreign treaty and The Constitution requires that it be approved by The Senate before enactment...It was not and completely unconstitutional.... Be that as it may, it accomplished exactly what Obama apparently wanted: it gave $1.7 Billion in undeserved cash to Iran to support terrorism.
Without getting into the controversy itself, Trump’s focus (during the entire term) was on dismantling what others did before. He never had a clear path for anything. The best example is Obamacare. Trump promised an alternative (a beautiful plan) repeatedly, but at the end he just tried to destroy Obamacare (only cause it was Obama), but not having an idea for something better.
Iran - the same
Boarder wall - amazingly he was able to sell the “project” to his voters with the promise that Mexico will pay. No thinking person would buy such baloney - but millions did.
Executive orders - Trump abused this option to the max. Originally designed for emergencies (like war or natural disasters). The funny part - he didn’t have to. Senate and house were in his pocket (at least for the first two years) as well as the majority of state governors. But for him it was personal, a show of power to sooth his Ego.
Obama abused it. Trump reversed most of his abuses. by the same mechanism. Now Biden (if election results are not over-turned) will reverse and extend the abuse..... Very dangerous trend. ..Any scholars of Roman History out there?
The Presidency is supposed to be a mere administrative, utilitarian position to carry out the laws of Congress that are meant to govern us....Remember, Lincoln was NOT the featured speaker at Gettysburg.
Umm...Trump (195) issued more Executive Orders than Obama (1st term 147). So, I guess you would call that abuse by Trump, right?
The courts can be used as a check on executive power. This has mostly been successful with Governors who try to grab absolute power through executive orders, but presidential orders can be eliminated too. Eventually congress and the senate will pass laws limiting executive orders. It has gone way too far for far too long. They are all at fault. They have trouble accepting they got elected president, not God, and the President does not really have a lot of power in many areas. He or she has alot of power in a few limited areas and that is how it is supposed to be. However they go in thinking they gt to personally direct all aspects of the country and get frustrated to find out that is not true.
Most everyone here is spot on: The growth in the use of executive orders is largely the result of the legislative branch demonstrating time and again that it is either unable or unwilling to do its job.
The biggest problem with the use of executive orders is that they have facilitated the growth of an administrative apparatus that is largely given deference by the courts even though its very existence is constitutionally questionable.
I think you've stated the problems, and yes they should be limited in scope.
Almost all presidents attempt to increase their power in any way they can. That's why we have a government of checks and balances.
On the other hand, Congress ought to stop being so partisan.
THIS is the real problem! Congress (and the Senate) have almost rendered government incapable of functioning as a system of checks and balances, by essentially voting as one monolithic block, according to R/D party.
We don't even need two parties anymore! -- Simply program a machine to cast a proportional vote, opposing/supporting whichever side favors the legislation.
Obama opened the door on Governing by Executive Order and essentially bypassing Congress. Trump continued this government by E-O.
It's past time to 'drain the swamp of career politicians' (with actual term-limits), but, unfortunately, those who would need to ratify term limits to become law, ... are the very people who benefit from not having them!
[/b] THIS is the real problem! Congress (and the Senate) have almost rendered government incapable of functioning as a system of checks and balances, by essentially voting as one monolithic block, according to R/D party.
We don't even need two parties anymore! -- Simply program a machine to cast a proportional vote, opposing/supporting whichever side favors the legislation.
Obama opened the door on Governing by Executive Order and essentially bypassing Congress. Trump continued this government by E-O.
It's past time to 'drain the swamp of career politicians' (with actual term-limits), but, unfortunately, those who would need to ratify term limits to become law, ... are the very people who benefit from not having them!
Sure, executive orders should be limited but until Congress is ready to face the reality of why it exists and puts the populace above the party we cannot expect that which the people need to be accomplished by them. Unfortunately, I don't expect that to change any time soon. Term limits and campaign finance reform may be steps in the right direction.
Sure, executive orders should be limited but until Congress is ready to face the reality of why it exists and puts the populace above the party we cannot expect that which the people need to be accomplished by them. Unfortunately, I don't expect that to change any time soon. Term limits and campaign finance reform may be steps in the right direction.
Executive Orders exist for times of emergency. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941 there was no time to ask congress before a response. The same with natural disasters. But the goal was never to bypass congress. In the founding fathers eyes congress is the supreme ruler. Unfortunately, they didn’t envision a situation of total stalemate and political paralysis created by the two party system.
Executive Orders exist for times of emergency. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941 there was no time to ask congress before a response. The same with natural disasters. But the goal was never to bypass congress. In the founding fathers eyes congress is the supreme ruler. Unfortunately, they didn’t envision a situation of total stalemate and political paralysis created by the two party system.
That partisan paralysis in Congress serves the status quo of a do nothing political system, wherein the two sides can blame the other for all the blockades to any real congressional service to us. Not a bad gig really, siting around the table talking about how they plan to undermine the other's efforts. Apparently, the voters like that system, to them it means---"My side is trying to do what's right, but the (sniff) other guys won't allow it." EO's are now the norm in our long term national emergency of divisional politics..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
