06-18-2024, 05:39 PM
If this actually managed to get through, then most of the issues being discussed here are hardly the point.
Enhancing one party's power on a more permanent basis through the executive is more or less putting the current power of the EO on steroids. Executive orders are, at this point, wielded very heavy-handedly by every single president that takes office. It's probably not a great practice, but it truly has become a case where both sides literally do it.
What makes these changes (EOs) somewhat tolerable is their temporary nature. If people dislike them enough, they can put another guy in in 4 years to draft a whole new slate of changes that may or may not last beyond that administration. Presidents have campaign promises to keep and optics to promote, so I get the temporary circumventing of the legislature for instant gratification.
Trying to be as non partisan as possible here, I'll list why I think this is a huge mistake for any administration or party: There's always a reaction. Especially in the current climate. Any attempt to ban abortion federally will be met with fierce opposition at the polls as will any attempt to ban gay marriage. I don't feel like this is entirely understood by people who keep working against those things, yet oddly I think Trump himself understands the impact well enough.
The big issue here is the only question you should ever ask when your party wants to enact sweeping change or enhance the power of one executive: what would the other side do with this power once this precendent is set? Would each side significantly re-shape the federal government with the election of a new president? I don't see why they wouldn't. I also don't see why they wouldn't continue to go even farther as the practiced continued. One day there's going to be someone in there, with this power, that you don't trust or like. That guy is now going to be even more powerful.
The executive branch is not intended to be any more or less powerful than the legislative or judicial. Any back door attempt to throw this out of balance is a fundamental change to how our government operates.
Enhancing one party's power on a more permanent basis through the executive is more or less putting the current power of the EO on steroids. Executive orders are, at this point, wielded very heavy-handedly by every single president that takes office. It's probably not a great practice, but it truly has become a case where both sides literally do it.
What makes these changes (EOs) somewhat tolerable is their temporary nature. If people dislike them enough, they can put another guy in in 4 years to draft a whole new slate of changes that may or may not last beyond that administration. Presidents have campaign promises to keep and optics to promote, so I get the temporary circumventing of the legislature for instant gratification.
Trying to be as non partisan as possible here, I'll list why I think this is a huge mistake for any administration or party: There's always a reaction. Especially in the current climate. Any attempt to ban abortion federally will be met with fierce opposition at the polls as will any attempt to ban gay marriage. I don't feel like this is entirely understood by people who keep working against those things, yet oddly I think Trump himself understands the impact well enough.
The big issue here is the only question you should ever ask when your party wants to enact sweeping change or enhance the power of one executive: what would the other side do with this power once this precendent is set? Would each side significantly re-shape the federal government with the election of a new president? I don't see why they wouldn't. I also don't see why they wouldn't continue to go even farther as the practiced continued. One day there's going to be someone in there, with this power, that you don't trust or like. That guy is now going to be even more powerful.
The executive branch is not intended to be any more or less powerful than the legislative or judicial. Any back door attempt to throw this out of balance is a fundamental change to how our government operates.
