In the wake of emotion following the shock of Sandy Hook, this coming Tuesday, a Washington group led by VP Joe Biden plans to place on the desk of the President their recommendations regarding increased gun control and safety.\u00a0 Foreshadowing their report, Biden publicly remarked that while multiple options remain, \u201cThe President is going to act.\u00a0 There are executives orders \u2014 executive action that can be taken.\u201d<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
U.S. presidents have been taking \u201cexecutive action\u201d for over 200 years.\u00a0 While these orders are not legislation, they still are accompanied by full force of law.\u00a0 The reality is there is no specific constitutional provision for the decrees, but there exists a vague granting of executive power in Article II.\u00a0 The idea is that presidents issue executive orders in order to assist in operational management of federal agencies or to carry out what they perceive as their unequivocal, \u201cconstitutional responsibilities.\u201d \u00a0 That\u2019s what the orders are supposed to do; however, through the years \u2014 as for some reason seems typical in contemporary culture \u2014 we have digressed…<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Initially, executive orders were issued for such as the following:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Via executive order, Teddy Roosevelt protected 130 million acres of land and created 5 national parks.\u00a0 Pres. Ford pardoned Richard Nixon.\u00a0 Executive orders have been arbitrarily and subjectively utilized, all via one man\u2019s discretion… albeit one very powerful man.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Don\u2019t let me also act as if all of the above was deemed categorically constitutional; much, in fact \u2014 even then \u2014 was controversial.\u00a0 Conventional wisdom tells us that Lincoln\u2019s actions were most likely unconstitutional, and the purported cruelty of Roosevelt\u2019s executive orders has been debated for decades.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Still, as alluded to, through the years, executive orders have digressed; they have become seemingly more arbitrary and albeit, more political.\u00a0 Such as…<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n There is more.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Friends, herein lies the challenge…<\/p>\n <\/p>\n If you are a supporter of Pres. Obama, the probability is that you wholeheartedly support his executive orders.\u00a0 If you were a supporter of Pres. Bush 43, you most likely supported his decrees.\u00a0 The challenge is that wisdom must be adhered to regardless of who is president.\u00a0 For example, should any president decide he or she has the discernment skills to dictate the approach to the economy \u2014 meaning proceed via executive order \u2014 such would scare me.\u00a0 For example, as much as I respect Pres. Obama, his economic background, in my opinion, is strikingly minimal.\u00a0 Hence, should he enact any executive order affecting our economic future, the Intramuralist would question the inherent wisdom.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Gun control?\u00a0 Gun control?\u00a0 Did VP Biden misspeak once again?\u00a0 Or is it totally ok to bypass Congress and simply dictate one\u2019s opinion, assuming it is wisest and best?\u00a0 Is it ok to bypass bipartisan debate?\u00a0 Is it wise?\u00a0 Or is it arrogant?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Great questions. \u00a0Guess we’ll see on Tuesday.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Respectfully,<\/p>\n AR<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In the wake of emotion following the shock of Sandy Hook, this coming Tuesday, a Washington group led by VP Joe Biden plans to place on the desk of the President their recommendations regarding increased gun control and safety.\u00a0 Foreshadowing their report, Biden publicly remarked that while multiple options remain, \u201cThe President is going to … <\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n