Home› Main Category› Second Amendment/Politics
Obama signs Executive Order...Can he control All US resources?
robert38-55 Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
I came across this while surfing the web this morning. I don't know how true it is or isn't but it will make a good dicussion. The National Defense Resources Preparedness order gives the Executive Branch the power to CONTROL and ALLOCATE energy,production, transportation, food, and water? This sounds like a dictatorship to me,and according to the article this was a direct result of Israel who may be planning an attack on Iran.
"It is what it is":usa:
Good point Jayhawker, I wouldn't say that I am worried,wondering maybe. I did some internet research on EO this morning ( and we all know what kind of information is on the web). Anyway listed below, the number of EO issued by past presidents. My research on the web show that EO were issued as far back as Former President George Washington. Though out history I don't think some of these EO were recorded completely. Looks like ole F.D.Roosevelt has the most for now.
President Obama has signed 114 Executive Orders to date during his Administration
GW Bush 268,
G. Bush 165
FD Roosevelt 3,466
There are two types of executive order. The most common is a document directing executive branch agencies how to carry out their legislative mission. The other type is a declaration of policy interpretation which intended for a wider, public audience.
Is there a controversy over issuing Executive Orders? I would say yes in some/most cases. Many of our US Presidents have been accused of using the 'power of the executive order' to make, not merely implement, policy. This is 800 kind of ways wrong. This is controversial, as it subverts the separation of powers as outlined in the US Constitution. Originating from the US Constitution,the legislative, executive, and judicial branches are kept distinct in order to prevent ABUSE of POWER. Combine a system of checks and balances like our Founding Father's did for us in our Constitution we have the separation of powers.
This is where I get confused about which branch of our US Government has power to do what. Aritcle Two, Section 1 of the Constitution the President becomes the commander in Chief of the Army and Navy,Militia of several states when called into service. The Constitution does not require the president to personally enforce the law,but rather uses officers subordinate to the president may perform such duties. Congress has the sole power to legislate for the United States. Under the non delegation doctrine, Congress may not delegate its lawmaking responsibilities to any other agency. In addition IIRC, Congress may dispute any presidential decisions,and therefore the President, possissing certain powers, must actually adhere to the direction set forth by Congress, which may override decisions made by the "Commander in Chief."
What I am getting at is this: Is our congress allowing our US Presidents, to issue EO, as an underhanded, covert, subtle way, of delegating their Legislative duties? One failed example of this was the case of Clinton vs. City of New York, where the Supreme Court stated that Congress is not permitted to delegate a "line-item" to the country's President. According to such power Congress attempted to delegate, the President would have the authority to abolish provisions of a bill prior to inputting his signatrue upon it.
I have to agree with alphasigmookie when he wrote:
. And since oil drives just about everything on this planet the ripple cascade domino effect will follow on other commodities like food, shelter, money, guns, ammo etc., etc., etc. I feel like this EO order is nothing more than an underhanded way of imposing Marshall Law when the time comes.