Disarming The Obama Administration
A number of emails have been received (and forwarded – please check before you do this) that claim President Barack Obama has signed over 900 Executive Orders with additional emails claiming one of these orders institutes Martial Law.
We must remember to verify the facts before pursuing these perceived irregularities – else we end up emboldening those who would engage in unscrupulous activities.
Truth be told, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the most Executive Orders numbering over 3,500. President Obama, to date, has signed fewer Execute Orders than either President Dwight David Eisenhower or Richard Nixon. Many of Obama’s orders are rather innocuous.
But, of late this situation has changed! FactCheck.org has done some substantial research into this area and notes the following:
It’s true that President Obama is increasingly using his executive powers in the face of staunch Republican opposition in Congress. He’s changed federal policies on immigration and welfare and appointed officials without congressional approval. But Obama’s executive actions have nothing to do with martial law.
Consider this statement – the implication is President Obama needed to use his Executive Powers due to the opposition of Republicans in Congress! This is a preposterous rational. The construct of our Legislative and Executive Branches was created specifically to make creating new laws difficult – we should also remember that the federal government has limited authority when making laws. When we hear these kinds of rationales, we must remember that usurping authority (the Legislative process) is unscrupulous and should be condemned – regardless of party.
To their credit, FactCheck.org did outline some of the more recent (and worrisome) Executive Orders signed by President Obama.
It’s true, however, that Obama is employing his executive powers now more than ever before during his presidency.
Obama has been sidestepping Congress through his “We Can’t Wait” initiative, a series of executive actions that he claims benefit the middle class through infrastructure projects and economic policy changes.
He also skirted Senate approval in January when he appointed nominees to the National Labor Relations Board and to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The appointments were unprecedented because he made them when the Senate was technically not in recess, prompting legal challenges from conservative groups.
In June, the president halted deportations of illegal immigrants who entered the United States when they were children and met certain requirements, such as the lack of a criminal record. The change mirrored provisions of the DREAM Act — failed legislation that Obama supported and Senate Republicans blocked in 2010.
And in July, Obama changed welfare policy to allow states to modify work requirements if they test new approaches to increasing employment. Obama did not submit the policy change to Congress for review, which the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office concluded he should have done.
So, why are these actions important?
Our nation’s history is replete with journalistic pursuits against government representatives abusing their authority. In recent decades we have seen an increase in whistleblowers coming forward to denounce these actions. Yet, during this administration, these detections are not occurring – until this past week.
In years past, our media outlets would be having a heyday with the current releases of information on the assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the new information about the Internal Revenue Service targeting specific groups. But today’s media is far more interested in promoting certain agendas than following the facts. But a change seems to be on the horizon.
When these whistleblower hearings on Benghazi were being promoted, it’s concern was that if the testimony was not strong, it would embolden further actions like these Executive Orders. Fortunately, it seems this testimony was strong enough to bring even the old guard media to attention – even ABC News is recognizing that the Talking Points on Benghazi went through 12 iterations and not the one alteration promoted by Jay Carney, the presidential press secretary. Couple this with the breaking news about the IRS targeting certain groups and we have a tour de force for those in the media to expose these obvious offenses by this administration.
What remains quite amazing is the number of Democrats who continue to believe there are not abnormalities. Many still point to President George W. Bush, while others simply do not believe anything was mishandled. These apologetics are perplexing (at best), but it seems these people have a so powerful a need that they will ignore the facts staring them in the face – or they are so vested in their party, they cannot or will not see the truth. Perhaps some have such a love for former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, they will not accept her complicity in these actions.
We must not fool ourselves – while these actions look to potentially be Impeachable that action will never take place with the current composition of Congress. But, if these hearings are well developed and our representatives pursue the facts first, then we may see a further diminution of power and backroom actions by this administration.