Elimination of Executive Orders

paranoid

Preserving American Freedom > Limiting the Expanse of Government Power > Elimination of Executive Orders

~~We demand elimination of presidential authority to issue executive orders and other mandates lacking congressional approval, as well as repeal of all previous executive orders and mandates.~~

(plank deleted)

These orders are not a sinister plot. Rather, they clarify or further a law of Congress or the Constitution.

Executive orders have been used since George Washington. Executive Order #1 (under a 1907 numbering scheme) is Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.

Checks and balances already limit overreaching or unconstitutional orders: for example, the Supreme Court invalidated a Truman executive order in 1952.

Fault:

paranoid

Comments

Paranoid?

Submitted by Greg (not verified) on Tue, 2010-09-07 13:45.

Paranoid? I think not. Executive orders were only supposed to be to the executive branch of the government. If a president could issue an executive order that would carry any weight similar to law, then that is a decree like what a monarch has. Which is exactly what the founders were fighting against. We had a monarch here in the United States (The king of England) and even a brief read of the debates of the Anti-Federalist papers would show that they too were fearful of the presidency having this power. The Federalists assured them that the government being created to be limited one.

However, that has not been the case. Executive Order 6102 "The Gold Seizure Act" is an excellent example of an executive order being used as a decree which was carried out with force of law. Executive Order 9066, dated February 19, 1942 allowed the miliatary to round up American Citizens and place them in the "Japanese Internment Camps".

There are many other examples of the Executive Branch over stepping its bounds. This is not paranoid, it is made with an eye at history. Anyone who thinks this is paranoia not only doesn't know their history but, is also foolish to say the least.

But do you realize the plank

Submitted by Aren Cambre on Tue, 2010-09-07 13:53.

But do you realize the plank calls for elimination of ALL executive orders, not just abusive ones?

Post new comment

Random plank

Educating Our Children > Religious Freedom in Public Schools

We urge school administrators and officials to inform Texas school students specifically of their First Amendment rights to pray and engage in religious speech, individually or in groups, on school property without government interference. We support and strongly urge Congress to pass a Religious Freedom Amendment, which provides: "Neither the United States nor any State shall prohibit student-sponsored prayer in public schools, nor compose any official student prayer or compel joining therein." We urge the Legislature to end censorship of discussion of religion in our founding documents, and encourage discussing those documents.

Reason:

It is wildly inappropriate to push "school administrators and officials" into a role traditionally held by parents and churches.

Courts have consistently upheld personal or student-initiatied right to prayer. What is unconstitutional is when student-initiated prayer becomes de facto policy, such as what brought about Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe.

The proposed amendment is dangerous. It would tacitly endorse public schooling on a federal level, creating a "gateway drug" to enhancing federal oversight of schools. Also, contemporary interpretaion of the First Amendment strongly defends most student-initiated prayer as free speech and defends against compulsory prayer.

Key founding documents in fact have minimal references to religion. There is no evidence of censorship.

bad precedent, misinformed, paranoid

Problems

Show problem parts of the platform:

Platforms promote principles and policies. Planks must not push particular polymorphic political proposals, including bills.about a specific bill (6)

Parts of these were recently implemented.accomplished (11)

Parts of these only promote limited religious viewpoints.advances religious doctrine (8)

Too many positions already overwhelm voters. We cannot add more without a plan to cut ballot complexity.another elected office (6)

The GOP should not be a virulent, anti-homosexual crusade.anti-homosexual crusade (6)

These destroy useful customs or start us down slippery slopes.bad precedent (17)

Cliches belong on the playground, not in serious platforms.cliche (5)

These contradict other planks.contradictory (13)

These simply go too far, overshooting a rational remedy.extreme (25)

These have factual errors.incorrect (11)

These planks advanced contemporary liberal causes or expand government.leftist (22)

These planks require belief in something that is untrue.misinformed (18)

These are not appropriate for a platform document.misuse of platform (6)

These planks have minor punctuation or grammatical errors.needs copyedit (8)

These problems were fixed before the 2008 platform was published.no longer relevant (3)

"Black helicopters" and paranoid conspiracy have no place in our party.paranoid (15)

Parts of these do nothing useful.pointless (61)

These proposals would make our kids stupider.reduces education quality (3)

These planks are internally redundant or repeat other parts of the platform.redundant (41)

These planks should propose a more general solution.too specific (6)

These planks are unclear or unfocused.vague (19)

Puffy prose, hackneyed phrases, and obscure words create pinheaded, unfocused, and inaccessible platforms. Platforms must be simple and direct.wordy (47)