Politicians Fiddle and We The People email, as Rome Burns! It is time for a Plan B!
We are all serious and trying in various ways to have an impact. Boone is doing his part and we are all on board. Let us not forget the President also needs our help and suggestions. He is reaching out and I respectfully submit the following to all to consider and move forward with.
Reality check: Politicians play politics and we should not expect much from them. We see how they have denuded the funding the President wanted in vary important environmental and people needs areas. There are too many corporate special interests and ‘power brokers’ elected officials and our guardians of the Health, Education and Welfare of the nation have to serve. The election is over and elected officials have their jobs secured until next term. Funny how our elected officials start to act and talk like Wall Street execs once they are secure in their political offices. Wall Street and the banks have received their pound of flesh and it looks like they want Washington to guarantee they can take a few pounds more out of the people.
People, it is time to push for some real Direct Action.
What is needed is for the President to appoint a private sector task force comprised of prominent corporate execs who are actually investing their money in America in a positive way to address and solve our energy and financial problems. He must also add strong grass roots organizations to the mix that have solid green agendas and let them all have a seat at the table as the Presidents Peoples Advisory Board. He needs some truly friendly and genuinely supportive people he can rely on for honest advice. Otherwise, he will be forced into the politics as usual game. Humpty Dumpty has had a great fall and all the Ivy League brains in America can not put Humpty Dumpty back together without the input of the benefit of the expertise of real independent self made business moguls like perhaps the Gates, the Pickens, the Buffets the Soros’s type mind sets and the grass roots organization that are at ground zero in their cities and rural areas and have solid plans.
We the people need a direct non political connection that is outside and not inside the political box! Take note that the President is now appointing a task force instead of a 'car czar' to address the automobile industry crisis because the problem is too complicated to be solved or managed by one ‘czar’. The same is true of the Greening of America.
Do you really think a bunch of congressmen and women and senators are going to be able to solve the energy problems or the financial crisis without compromising all the teeth out of the legislation? You can not even find out what was left in and what was taken out of the Reinvestment Act or the old TARP ! Keep in mind the President does not have the kind of deep 'old boy' beltway political power it takes to accomplish what is really necessary. He will be forced to compromise on every point - winning the Electoral College does not mean you 'won the real power' or even have the support of the ‘beltway crowd’!
The President's power will come from the people and groups that rally and demand the political promises be kept and the needs of the people be met. He can do this if he uses his power to issue Executive Orders to accomplish what needs to be accomplished in the short term and for the long term.
We should all carefully review what an Executive Order (EO) is and how they have been used and how they can be used as a very effective means to accomplish the objectives of the Picken’s Plan and any other plans groups have to address the problems We the People and the nation face. You will be surprised what the President can do through an Executive Order, if he has the courage to use this very powerful tool. It is a game changer, especially when a President and the nation are faced with resistance to needed change and transformation.
An Executive Order (EO) is a legally binding order given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. EOs are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies. However, in many instances they have been used to guide agencies in directions contrary to congressional intent. I posit that the President could use EOs to effectively correct misuse of the TARP funds and influence the use of the new Reinvestment Act Funds in light of the legislative intent and the needs of the nation. Strange how the TARP funds were provided on certain premises and then the game was changed with no explanation. This can be rectified!
Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. The President's source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive Power." Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To implement or execute the laws of the land, Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and departments, often in the form of Executive Orders.
Click here and visit The White House briefing room and see Executive Orders President Obama has already issued. Then ponder what he could do for the causes we are all fighting for!
The following text is excerpted from Executive Order 1289 issued by former President Clinton. Click here for the entire text.
EXECUTIVE
ORDER EO 12898
Effective Date: February 11, 1994
Responsible Office: Office of Mission to Planet Earth
Subject: FEDERAL ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN MINORITY POPULATIONS AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS
TEXT
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution
and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby
ordered as follows:
Section 1-1. IMPLEMENTATION.
1-101. Agency Responsibilities. To the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, and consistent with the
principles set forth in the report on the National Performance
Review, each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental
justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities
on monitoring populations and low-income populations in the
United States and its territories and possessions, the District
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands.
1-102. Creation of an Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice (a) Within 3 months of the date of this
order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
("Administrator") or the Administrator's designee shall convene
an interagency Federal Working Group on Environmental Justice
("Working Group"). The Working Group shall comprise the heads of
the following executive agencies and offices, or their designees:
(a) Department of Defense; (b) Department of Health and Human
Services; (c) Department of Housing and Urban Development; (d)
Department of Labor; (e) Department of Agriculture; (f)
Department of Transportation; (g) Department of Justice; (h)
Department of the Interior; (i) Department of Commerce; (j)
Department of Energy; (k) Environmental Protection Agency; (l)
Office of Management and Budget; (m) Office of Science and
Technology Policy; (n) Office of the Deputy Assistant to the
President for Environmental Policy; (o) Office of the Assistant
to the President for Domestic Policy; (p) National Economic
Council; (q) Council of Economic Advisers; and (r) such other
Government officials as the President may designate. The Working
Group shall report to the President through the Deputy Assistant
to the President for Environmental Policy and the Assistant to
the President for Domestic Policy.
(b) The Working Group shall: (1) provide guidance to Federal
agencies on criteria for identifying disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations and low-income populations;
(2) coordinate with, provide guidance to, and serve as a
clearinghouse for, each Federal agency as it develops an
environmental justice strategy as required by section 1-103 of
this order, in order to ensure that the administration,
interpretation and enforcement of programs, activities and
policies are undertaken in a consistent manner;
(3) assist in coordinating research by, and stimulating
cooperation among, the Environmental Protection Agency, the
Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, and other agencies conducting
research or other activities in accordance with section 3-3 of
this order.
(4) assist in coordinating data collection, required by
this order;
(5) examine existing data and studies on environmental
justice;
(6) hold public meetings as required in section 5-502(d) of
this order; and
(7) develop interagency model projects on environmental
justice that evidence cooperation among Federal agencies.
1-103. Development of Agency Strategies. (a) Except as
provided in section 6-605 of this order, each Federal agency
shall develop an agency-wide environmental justice strategy, as
set forth in subsections (b)-(e) of this section that identifies
and addresses disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities
on minority populations and low-income populations. The
environmental justice strategy shall list programs, policies,
planning and public participation processes, enforcement, and/or
rulemakings related to human health or the environment that
should be revised to, at a minimum: (1) promote enforcement of
all health and environmental statutes in areas with minority
populations and low-income populations; (2) ensure greater public
participation; (3) improve research and data collection relating
to the health of and environment of minority populations and low-
income populations; and (4) identify differential patterns of
consumption of natural resources among minority populations and
low-income populations. In addition, the environmental justice
strategy shall include, where appropriate, a timetable for
undertaking identified revisions and consideration of economic
and social implications of the revisions…………..
Also click here to read the Order establishing policies and procedures for the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to use in complying
with the above Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (EO 12898), dated February 11, 1994.
The following are a sampling of Fair Housing-Related Presidential Executive Orders. They provide insight into how Eos have been used, Google them:
Executive Order 11063
Executive Order 11063 prohibits discrimination in the sale, leasing, rental, or other disposition of properties and facilities owned or operated by the federal government or provided with federal funds.
Executive Order 11246
Executive Order 11246, as amended, bars discrimination in federal employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Executive Order 12892
Executive Order 12892, as amended, requires federal agencies to affirmatively further fair housing in their programs and activities, and provides that the Secretary of HUD will be responsible for coordinating the effort. The Order also establishes the President's Fair Housing Council, which will be chaired by the Secretary of HUD.
Executive Order 12898
Executive Order 12898 requires that each federal agency conduct its program, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment in a manner that does not exclude persons based on race, color, or national origin.
Executive Order 13217
Executive Order 13217 requires federal agencies to evaluate their policies and programs to determine if any can be revised or modified to improve the availability of community-based living arrangements for persons with disabilities.
My friends I invite all who are of the mind set to draft Executive Orders and email them to the President. Remind him he has a power he can use and ‘we the people’ will support his use of it for the Greening of America city by city, industry by industry! We the People are not without Power. We have a President who is begging for our input. Read his lips! The Executive Order is the only way the President can step outside the constraints of the political box that thwarts his initiatives. Let me know what you think, Peace
Reality check: Politicians play politics and we should not expect much from them. We see how they have denuded the funding the President wanted in vary important environmental and people needs areas. There are too many corporate special interests and ‘power brokers’ elected officials and our guardians of the Health, Education and Welfare of the nation have to serve. The election is over and elected officials have their jobs secured until next term. Funny how our elected officials start to act and talk like Wall Street execs once they are secure in their political offices. Wall Street and the banks have received their pound of flesh and it looks like they want Washington to guarantee they can take a few pounds more out of the people.
People, it is time to push for some real Direct Action.
What is needed is for the President to appoint a private sector task force comprised of prominent corporate execs who are actually investing their money in America in a positive way to address and solve our energy and financial problems. He must also add strong grass roots organizations to the mix that have solid green agendas and let them all have a seat at the table as the Presidents Peoples Advisory Board. He needs some truly friendly and genuinely supportive people he can rely on for honest advice. Otherwise, he will be forced into the politics as usual game. Humpty Dumpty has had a great fall and all the Ivy League brains in America can not put Humpty Dumpty back together without the input of the benefit of the expertise of real independent self made business moguls like perhaps the Gates, the Pickens, the Buffets the Soros’s type mind sets and the grass roots organization that are at ground zero in their cities and rural areas and have solid plans.
We the people need a direct non political connection that is outside and not inside the political box! Take note that the President is now appointing a task force instead of a 'car czar' to address the automobile industry crisis because the problem is too complicated to be solved or managed by one ‘czar’. The same is true of the Greening of America.
Do you really think a bunch of congressmen and women and senators are going to be able to solve the energy problems or the financial crisis without compromising all the teeth out of the legislation? You can not even find out what was left in and what was taken out of the Reinvestment Act or the old TARP ! Keep in mind the President does not have the kind of deep 'old boy' beltway political power it takes to accomplish what is really necessary. He will be forced to compromise on every point - winning the Electoral College does not mean you 'won the real power' or even have the support of the ‘beltway crowd’!
The President's power will come from the people and groups that rally and demand the political promises be kept and the needs of the people be met. He can do this if he uses his power to issue Executive Orders to accomplish what needs to be accomplished in the short term and for the long term.
We should all carefully review what an Executive Order (EO) is and how they have been used and how they can be used as a very effective means to accomplish the objectives of the Picken’s Plan and any other plans groups have to address the problems We the People and the nation face. You will be surprised what the President can do through an Executive Order, if he has the courage to use this very powerful tool. It is a game changer, especially when a President and the nation are faced with resistance to needed change and transformation.
An Executive Order (EO) is a legally binding order given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. EOs are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies. However, in many instances they have been used to guide agencies in directions contrary to congressional intent. I posit that the President could use EOs to effectively correct misuse of the TARP funds and influence the use of the new Reinvestment Act Funds in light of the legislative intent and the needs of the nation. Strange how the TARP funds were provided on certain premises and then the game was changed with no explanation. This can be rectified!
Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. The President's source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive Power." Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To implement or execute the laws of the land, Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and departments, often in the form of Executive Orders.
Click here and visit The White House briefing room and see Executive Orders President Obama has already issued. Then ponder what he could do for the causes we are all fighting for!
The following text is excerpted from Executive Order 1289 issued by former President Clinton. Click here for the entire text.
EXECUTIVE
ORDER EO 12898
Effective Date: February 11, 1994
Responsible Office: Office of Mission to Planet Earth
Subject: FEDERAL ACTIONS TO ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN MINORITY POPULATIONS AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS
TEXT
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution
and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby
ordered as follows:
Section 1-1. IMPLEMENTATION.
1-101. Agency Responsibilities. To the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, and consistent with the
principles set forth in the report on the National Performance
Review, each Federal agency shall make achieving environmental
justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities
on monitoring populations and low-income populations in the
United States and its territories and possessions, the District
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands.
1-102. Creation of an Interagency Working Group on
Environmental Justice (a) Within 3 months of the date of this
order, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
("Administrator") or the Administrator's designee shall convene
an interagency Federal Working Group on Environmental Justice
("Working Group"). The Working Group shall comprise the heads of
the following executive agencies and offices, or their designees:
(a) Department of Defense; (b) Department of Health and Human
Services; (c) Department of Housing and Urban Development; (d)
Department of Labor; (e) Department of Agriculture; (f)
Department of Transportation; (g) Department of Justice; (h)
Department of the Interior; (i) Department of Commerce; (j)
Department of Energy; (k) Environmental Protection Agency; (l)
Office of Management and Budget; (m) Office of Science and
Technology Policy; (n) Office of the Deputy Assistant to the
President for Environmental Policy; (o) Office of the Assistant
to the President for Domestic Policy; (p) National Economic
Council; (q) Council of Economic Advisers; and (r) such other
Government officials as the President may designate. The Working
Group shall report to the President through the Deputy Assistant
to the President for Environmental Policy and the Assistant to
the President for Domestic Policy.
(b) The Working Group shall: (1) provide guidance to Federal
agencies on criteria for identifying disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations and low-income populations;
(2) coordinate with, provide guidance to, and serve as a
clearinghouse for, each Federal agency as it develops an
environmental justice strategy as required by section 1-103 of
this order, in order to ensure that the administration,
interpretation and enforcement of programs, activities and
policies are undertaken in a consistent manner;
(3) assist in coordinating research by, and stimulating
cooperation among, the Environmental Protection Agency, the
Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, and other agencies conducting
research or other activities in accordance with section 3-3 of
this order.
(4) assist in coordinating data collection, required by
this order;
(5) examine existing data and studies on environmental
justice;
(6) hold public meetings as required in section 5-502(d) of
this order; and
(7) develop interagency model projects on environmental
justice that evidence cooperation among Federal agencies.
1-103. Development of Agency Strategies. (a) Except as
provided in section 6-605 of this order, each Federal agency
shall develop an agency-wide environmental justice strategy, as
set forth in subsections (b)-(e) of this section that identifies
and addresses disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities
on minority populations and low-income populations. The
environmental justice strategy shall list programs, policies,
planning and public participation processes, enforcement, and/or
rulemakings related to human health or the environment that
should be revised to, at a minimum: (1) promote enforcement of
all health and environmental statutes in areas with minority
populations and low-income populations; (2) ensure greater public
participation; (3) improve research and data collection relating
to the health of and environment of minority populations and low-
income populations; and (4) identify differential patterns of
consumption of natural resources among minority populations and
low-income populations. In addition, the environmental justice
strategy shall include, where appropriate, a timetable for
undertaking identified revisions and consideration of economic
and social implications of the revisions…………..
Also click here to read the Order establishing policies and procedures for the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to use in complying
with the above Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations (EO 12898), dated February 11, 1994.
The following are a sampling of Fair Housing-Related Presidential Executive Orders. They provide insight into how Eos have been used, Google them:
Executive Order 11063
Executive Order 11063 prohibits discrimination in the sale, leasing, rental, or other disposition of properties and facilities owned or operated by the federal government or provided with federal funds.
Executive Order 11246
Executive Order 11246, as amended, bars discrimination in federal employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Executive Order 12892
Executive Order 12892, as amended, requires federal agencies to affirmatively further fair housing in their programs and activities, and provides that the Secretary of HUD will be responsible for coordinating the effort. The Order also establishes the President's Fair Housing Council, which will be chaired by the Secretary of HUD.
Executive Order 12898
Executive Order 12898 requires that each federal agency conduct its program, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment in a manner that does not exclude persons based on race, color, or national origin.
Executive Order 13217
Executive Order 13217 requires federal agencies to evaluate their policies and programs to determine if any can be revised or modified to improve the availability of community-based living arrangements for persons with disabilities.
My friends I invite all who are of the mind set to draft Executive Orders and email them to the President. Remind him he has a power he can use and ‘we the people’ will support his use of it for the Greening of America city by city, industry by industry! We the People are not without Power. We have a President who is begging for our input. Read his lips! The Executive Order is the only way the President can step outside the constraints of the political box that thwarts his initiatives. Let me know what you think, Peace
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by William "Leland" Luster on -
Dear Dr. F.E. Young; totally enlightening, to say the least. I am at a loss as how to present this important page to my other Energy web communities. Can you add this page to www.wiserearth.org/group/leland1, www.linkedin.com/in/leland1, www.plaxo.com/user/leland1, my other network sites? I can friend you at Pickens Plan-my page, or you can send me a friend request and we can connect that way I believe. Your site always has the best educational directives, for us who just want to broadcast your obvious higher wisdom and social integrity. Please help me to diseminate this vital word, sincerely wanting to become your friend William "Leland" Luster/ Las Vegas,Nevada/02-16-2009.
-
Permalink Reply by William "Leland" Luster on
-
Dr.F.E. Young; I forgot to include my E-address if unable to send your page, it is: leland1949@gmail.com again thank you respected sir. WLL
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Anthony Fernald Sr. on -
Wise words from a Friend.
This says it all.
You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and then the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friends, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
We need to stop giving our Money to the self righteous Government. We the people need to take charge and take our Country back. this what I would like to accomplish.
Mike
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on -
Reality Check: We have socialism for one sector of the economy and capitalism for another. I guess we can say The Wall Street bail out was socialism for the financial sector. I huge welfare check to prevent them from falling into the abyss of poverty. An abyss that many of main street and the middle class find themselves slipping into and apparently are willing to accept the bitter pill of socialism or should we say Social-Capitalism to make it a bit more palpable.
The government takes from the future generations to give to Wall Street and the investment bankers etc. to save their buts. They caused the financial meltdown by creating CDOs and other 'tricky dick financial instruments' and circulated them around the world.
-
Permalink Reply by Shari Greer on -
Personally, I think that our new President will do what he has to do. Period. Him taking full responsibility for the 'mistake' on his cabinet inclusions, was huge. Nowhere in our history has such a phenominal man been in the White House.
I think he has open ears to the people. I think he will make the right decisions because he is so smart, and knows the right questions to ask to get there. I am so proud of him, his family, and the American people who put him in office.
I don't feel equipped to draft an executive order, but I will stand beside those who do. Thank you for taking the time and making the effort to bring this forward. I do believe you will make an impact on many who will write to the President.
Thank you. Thank you for wanting to make a difference, and for supporting these issues.
Shari Greer
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on
-
Ms. Greer thank you for your honest heartfelt insight. You have pointed out a very important fact - the President is able to take full responsibility for mistakes he makes. This is of huge importance, especially since people have loss so much faith in government and institutions in general.
In terms of actually drafting an Executive Order it is sufficient to simply recommend that one be used by the President to support or clarify the intention of an existing law or issue. I think many of us feel that the legislation relating to any of the bail out funds could benefit from an Executive Order specifically clearing up how the funds should be used on not be used. The politicians did such a botched job with clearing setting down in writing how the TARP funds were to be that the President could step up and issue an EO to specify a use or uses. Peace
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on
-
Ms. Greer I submit the following to provide insight into how organizations are approaching the Executive Order issue and to show how they can be used. In the hands of a President with a good heart and good intentions the Executive Order is a very powerful tool. Especially in times when our elected officials are having difficulty agreeing on doing what is right for the the environment and the segments of society that are suffering the most. Peace.
The Presidential Executive Order: Have no Fear
Have no fear of the Executive Order. The only thing we have to fear is you know........;or lies like the Gulf of Tonkin or fear mongering like WMDs. "We the people" had been sleep for eight years.
A review of wikis reveals: The Department of State instituted a numbering scheme for executive orders in 1907, starting retroactively with an order issued on October 20, 1862, by President Abraham Lincoln. That order became necessary when Union forces captured New Orleans; Lincoln issued the order to establish military courts in Louisiana. Today, only National Security Directives are kept from the public.
Until the 1950s, there were no rules or guidelines outlining what the president could or could not do through an executive order. However, the Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution. Presidents since this decision have generally been careful to cite which specific laws they are acting under when issuing new executive orders.
I leave it to you to research further how the Executive Order has historically been used over the years by past Presidents and how they can be effectively used today. We would hope that President Obama would use his Constitutional Power to issue Executive Orders in a positive way and to benefit ‘we the people’.
The Center for Progressive reform presents very interesting uses of the EO and we all know that time is of the essence. Kindly review the following.
The Center for Progressive Reform passed on their suggestions for 7 Executive Orders for the President’s First 100 Days and so I pay them forward to you to debate and discuss in the context of the current state of the environment and the nation. They cover a range of perennial issues familiar to TreeHugger readers—Climate change, chemicals in products intended for children, pollution, preserving ecosystems on public lands.
Here they are:
1. Reduce the Federal Carbon Footprint
The new President should issue an Executive Order requiring each federal agency to measure, report, and reduce its carbon footprint. Not only would the Executive Order have a meaningful impact on the federal government's carbon emissions, it could also lead to the creation of uniform, practical standards for measuring such footprints, standards that could be applied government-wide and beyond. Each of the provisions of this proposed Order is consistent with the goals of the National Environmental Policy Act.
2. Consider Climate Change in All Decisions
The next President should issue a new Executive Order clarifying that all federal agencies are obligated to consider the global climate change-related implications of their actions. This proposed Order is consistent with the goals of the National Environmental Policy Act.
3. Protect Children from Chemicals
The next President should amend Executive Order 13045 (issued initially by President
Clinton and then amended by President Bush) to mandate that agencies establish an affirmative agenda for protecting children from lead, mercury, perchlorate, phthalates, fine particulate matter, ozone, and pesticides; require the reform of risk assessment policy so that children are accounted for as a vulnerable group; and end the use of discounting the value of children's lives in cost-benefit analysis. As is the case with the provisions of the existing Order on Protecting Children, each of these recommendations is consistent with the goals of the various environmental, safety, and public health statutes.
4. Environmental Justice
The next President should amend or replace the original Executive Order [12898] on Environmental Justice. The new Order should require a meaningful analysis of the environmental justice impacts and implications of all major new rules; impose on agencies a substantive obligation to take affirmative steps to ameliorate environmental injustice; launch an affirmative Environmental Justice agenda; hold agencies accountable for carrying out their environmental justice obligations; and clarify key terms from the current Order, including “environmental justice communities” and “subsistence,” to avoid the kind of narrow interpretation of the terms applied by the Bush Administration. As is the case with the existing Executive Order on Environmental Justice, these recommendations are consistent with the goals of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
5. Transparent Regulatory Review
The new President should issue an Executive Order restoring open government in three areas where unwarranted secrecy has developed. The Order should restore the presumption of disclosure concerning exemptions from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) so that political appointees and career government employees cannot operate free of scrutiny; forbid agencies from taking advantage of loopholes that limit the transparency provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) so that the public can be assured that special interests do not have undue influence on agency decision making; and improve the transparency of regulatory review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) so that efforts by political appointees in the White House to override the judgment of scientists and other experts in regulatory agencies can at least be transparent to the public. All of the proposed Order's provisions are consistent with the goals of FOIA and FACA.
6. Protect Stronger State Laws from Weaker Federal Ones
CPR points out that the Bush Administration often preempted stronger state laws on environmental regulation with weaker federal ones:
The next President should [...] should amend the existing Executive Order on Federalism to strengthen provisions setting forth a presumption against preemption; require agencies to provide a written justification for preemption; and require that, when a federal statute allows states to adopt more stringent standards or seek a waiver of statutory preemption (as in EPA's denial of California's Clean Air Act waiver), agencies must provide a written justification to the White House before denying the state's regulatory authority or waiver request. As is the case with the existing Executive Order on Federalism, these recommendations are consistent with the goals of the various statutes under which the environmental, safety, and public health agencies operate, including the National Environmental Policy Act.
7. Promoting Ecological Integrity
The next President should issue a new Executive Order declaring a national policy of
promoting ecological integrity as a baseline requirement for sustainable public land use. The President should also revoke two Bush Administration Executive Orders issued in 2005 (Executive Orders 13211 and 13212) that made it easier to develop energy resources on public lands, even at the risk of causing long-term degradation of natural resource values. In addition, the President should amend a third Bush Order (Executive Order 13443) by providing equal opportunities for public participation in federal land use decision making to a wide variety of constituencies, in addition to those promoting hunting. All of these measures are consistent with the goals of the various public lands statutes.
These are just the summaries of what CPR believes President Obama should do (obviously the document was worded with either Obama or McCain in mind).
Click here for the full version of Protecting Public Health and the Environment by Stroke of a Presidential Pen which goes into much more detail as to why these Executive Orders should be enacted.
-
Permalink Reply by Kelly Crosby on -
At what point does the issuance of an EO become the workings of a dictator?
Don't get me wrong - done in the benefit "OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people", it is one of a very few options for over-riding a completely corrupt and scandalously self-serving Congress.
But I cannot help but be concerned. A great many GOOD people have been corrupted by power. Many politicians enter with good intentions but have NO CHOICE but to 'play the game' in order to get anything done and then they become part of the problem instead of part of the answer.
I fear a Constitutional Convention is on the way...
I like your idea of President's Advisory Board OF the PEOPLE - but how do you select people who have the best interest of America in mind? How do you keep that power from corrupting as well....and who chooses?
No President takes office without owing favors...
I am proud of him re-structuring his cabinet. BUT I cannot support the fact that Barney Frank was chosen when he should have been PROSECUTED - what he did was easily worse than Madoff...
Is his heart in the right place or is he just better at telling us what he thinks we want to hear. I'm waiting for proof in the pudding...
I like the name of this discussion - it really does sum up one of my issues - what good can we do, blogging away like this - How I wish someone had the ability to really have all of these discussions with real feedback from the President....
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on
-
At what point does a President become drunk with power? I guess we have to look back to say Nixon or the last 4 years. Executive Orders have been around hundreds of years one can easily review them and see how they have been used. For example compare Reagan Eisenhower Carter Nixon Bush - Bush Clinton Obama - see what our past Presidents have used the EO to accomplish. From the looks of things in DC to day the congress and the senate have gone mad and are in total confusion over what to do. One thing they seem to agree on is to fiddle as the economy crumbles!
Reality check: The closest we have come to a dictator was not due to the use of the EO it was due to both parties and the American people succumbing to fear mongering and believing out right lies from the highest pulpits of our government - and that's the truth Ruth - as the saying goes.
Check the following and understand who the real dictators are and the enemy that bought our great financial system and economy to its knees. Frightening how we look the wrong way at the wrong time. The Financial Dictators were busy spinning their web:
Subprime Securities Market Began as `Group of 5' Over Chinese
By Mark Pittman
Dec. 17, 2007 (Bloomberg) -- Representatives of five of Wall Street's dominant investment banks gathered around a blonde wood conference table on a February night almost three years ago. Their talks over take-out Chinese food led to the perfect formula for a U.S. housing collapse.
The host was Greg Lippmann, then 36, a fast-talking Deutsche Bank AG trader who aspired to make mortgage securities as big a cash cow for Wall Street as the $12 trillion corporate credit market.
His allies included 34-year-old Rajiv Kamilla, a trader at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. with a background in nuclear physics, and 32-year-old Todd Kushman, who led a contingent from Bear Stearns Cos. Representatives from Citigroup Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co. were also invited. Almost 50 traders and lawyers showed up for the first meeting at Deutsche Bank's Wall Street office to help set the trading rules and design the new product.
``To tell you the truth, it's not very glamorous,'' Lippmann says. ``Just a bunch of guys eating Chinese discussing legal arcana.''
Those meetings of the ``group of five,'' as the traders called themselves, became a turning point in the history of Wall Street and the global economy.
The new standardized contracts they created would allow firms to protect themselves from the risks of subprime mortgages, enable speculators to bet against the U.S. housing market, and help meet demand from institutional investors for the high yields of loans to homeowners with poor credit.
Boom Turns Bust
The tools also magnified losses so much that a small number of defaulting subprime borrowers could devastate securities held by banks and pension funds globally, freeze corporate lending, and bring the world's credit markets to a standstill.
For a while, the subprime boom enriched investment bankers, lenders, brokers, investors, realtors and credit-rating companies. It allowed hundreds of thousands of Americans to buy homes they never believed they could afford.
It later became clear that these homeowners couldn't keep up with their payments. Defaults on subprime mortgages have so far produced about $80 billion in losses on securities backed by them. The market for the instruments is so opaque that many firms still aren't sure how much they've lost.
Chief executives at Citigroup, Merrill Lynch & Co. and UBS AG were replaced. To forestall a housing-led recession, the Federal Reserve has cut its benchmark rate three times since August and is injecting as much as $40 billion into the credit system to encourage banks to lend to each other.
`You Can't Wait'
This is the story of how Wall Street transmitted the practices of southern California's go-go lending industry and the inflated U.S. real estate market to the global financial system:
-- In Orange County, California, a mortgage lender named Daniel Sadek was among those who took notice of the increase in Wall Street's appetite for subprime loans. He turned the staff at his firm, Quick Loan Funding, into a subprime mortgage factory. ``You can't wait,'' said his ads, aimed at high-risk borrowers. ``We won't let you.''
-- In Dallas, a hedge-fund manager named Kyle Bass taught himself to use the contracts pioneered by Lippmann's group, then went looking for mortgage-backed securities to bet against. He found them in instruments based on loans Sadek made.
-- In New York, the ratings companies Standard & Poor's, Moody's Investors Service and Fitch Ratings put their stamp of approval on securities backed by loans to people who couldn't afford them. They used historical data to grade the securities and didn't adjust quickly enough for the widespread weakening of criteria used to qualify high-risk borrowers. Among the securities on which they bestowed investment-grade ratings: those backed by Sadek's loans.
`Robert Parker of Raw Fish'
Lippmann was a Wall Street renaissance man, with a strong appetite for sushi and an online restaurant guide so comprehensive one blogger labeled him ``the Robert Parker of raw fish.'' He opened the kitchen of the $2.3-million Manhattan loft he lived in then, complete with six burners, two grills and 20- foot island, to an Italian cooking class.
The goal of Lippmann's group on that winter evening in 2005: to design a new financial product that would standardize mortgage-backed securities, including those based on high-yield subprime loans, paving the way for their rapid growth. Of the firms participating that night, Lippmann's Deutsche Bank is based in Frankfurt, UBS in Zurich and the others in New York.
In February 2005, pension funds, banks and hedge funds owned fixed-income securities that were earning returns close to historic lows. AAA-rated securities based on home loans offered yields averaging a full percentage point higher than 10-year Treasuries at the time, according to Merrill.
Lure of Subprime
The trouble was that most creditworthy borrowers had already refinanced their houses at 2003's record-low mortgage rates. To meet demand for mortgage-backed securities, Wall Street had to find a new source of loans. Those still available mainly involved subprime borrowers, who paid higher rates because they were seen as credit risks.
While the group of five banks had packaged billions of dollars in subprime-based securities, in February 2005 none was among the leaders in the home-equity bond business. Countrywide Securities, RBS Greenwich Capital Markets, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Credit Suisse Group and Morgan Stanley dominated the industry.
The banks wanted more mortgage-backed securities to sell to clients. Creating a standardized ``synthetic'' instrument, or derivative, would leverage small numbers of subprime mortgages into bigger securities. In this way, the firms could produce enough to meet global demand.
Building the Rocket
``We called up the guys we felt like we knew and could work with,'' Lippmann says.
Deutsche Bank sprang for the take-out food, and traders and lawyers sat down to design a new product and create what would soon become one of the hottest capital markets in the world.
The meetings were monthly, beginning at 5 p.m., after the trading day, and lasted more than three hours each.
``In the beginning, everybody brought their lawyer,'' says Lippmann.
Eventually, the Chinese food was replaced with deli fare because some participants complained it wasn't kosher.
The group sought to bring ``transparency,'' or openness, and ``liquidity,'' or trading volume sufficient to ensure ease of buying and selling, to the mortgage market.
The most important issues centered on how to account for the eccentricities of mortgage bonds, perhaps the most difficult-to-value securities on Wall Street. Unlike corporate bonds, home loans can be paid back at any time.
`Pay as You Go'
Traditionally, the best mortgage traders have been those who can read macro-economic trends to guess when homeowners will pre-pay their loans. Until recently, early repayment was perceived as the biggest risk faced by Wall Street's mortgage desks.
One concern with creating a standardized contract for mortgage-backed securities was that it was difficult to agree on a simple method of determining how market-changing events affected the values of the complicated, layered instruments.
To deal with the complexity, the group of five decided to install a ``pay-as-you-go'' system. When something happened affecting the cash flows underlying the security, the seller would have to make cash payments to the buyer immediately, and vice versa.
ISDA Steps In
As the group nailed down the details, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, which sets trading terms for dealers, arranged conference calls including more of Wall Street.
To this point, some of the biggest mortgage underwriters -- Lehman Brothers, Merrill, Bank of America Corp. and Morgan Stanley -- hadn't been included in the negotiations. These firms heard about the talks and demanded to be let in.
On the conference calls, which included the market leaders, things got testy. One point in dispute was whether the contract should be traded on the basis of price or yield.
``Some of those points of detail were getting a little heated on the calls, and it was just thought it would be better to have a meeting face to face to move beyond those points,'' says Edward Murray, a London-based partner of the international law firm of Allen & Overy who was the chairman of the meeting and the outside counsel for ISDA. ``To be frank, the dealers that were not in the group of five were not that happy that there was a group of five.''
ISDA sought to resolve the differences by calling a sit- down meeting at its New York headquarters. Over coffee and pastries, Murray faced a crowd of dozens of traders and lawyers. Kamilla and Kushman acted as discussion leaders.
`Talk Was Very Firm'
``Rajiv would say something, and I'd be absolutely convinced about what he said,'' Murray says. ``And then Todd would say, `Well, I don't agree.' And I would be absolutely convinced about what Todd said. And then Rajiv would say `Well, the reason you're wrong is' and so on, et cetera.'' Kamilla and Kushman declined to discuss the negotiations.
Michael Edman, one of Morgan Stanley's representatives at the ISDA conference, was less chipper, Murray says.
``Arms folded, frown on his face, I'm not sure that's exactly true, but he wasn't in a happy-go-lucky mood,'' Murray says. ``There wasn't any shouting or anything, but the talk was very firm.'' Edman, who no longer works for Morgan Stanley, declined to comment.
By June, the differences were sorted out, the new contract was endorsed, and banks that hadn't been party to the group of five negotiations signed on. The banks would go on to create similar derivative contracts to trade securities backed by loans for commercial buildings and collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, which are securities backed by various kinds of debt.
Creation of Index
Another necessary step was to create an index to represent the market and help hedge general market exposure. It was called the ABX-HE and would be similar to the indexes traders use for baskets of stocks. This, participants believed, would add to the market's liquidity, or depth, by attracting more trading.
By September 2005, some within Deutsche Bank were beginning to worry about defaults on subprime mortgages and how that might affect the securities based on them. A team of Deutsche Bank analysts that month warned of growing subprime market risks.
The ABX-HE index started trading on Jan. 19, 2006. At 8 a.m. on the first day, John Kane of Sorin Capital started phoning dealers. Kane, then 27, was a trader at Sorin, which runs hedge funds that invest in mortgages and other securities.
His auto mechanic, in describing the debt burden he was carrying to own a home, had planted the idea in Kane's mind that the housing market might be in trouble. Kane thought it through, ran an analysis on available data, and decided to wager against, or ``short,'' subprime. To do that, he turned to the portion of the ABX index dealing with the lowest investment-grade subprime securities.
Investors Go Short
The trouble was that quotes from brokers selling the ABX were already dropping, an indication that a number of investors wanted to do the same thing.
``All the other dealers were already scared'' and dropping their bids, Kane said while on a panel at a November industry conference. ``All but Goldman. So I bought from them.''
On its first day, the index traded more than $5 billion. The cost of wagering against the securities was rising, a sign that traders saw an increased chance of default. An early warning was visible to anyone who knew where to look.
The new derivatives were a hit among the group of five's customers -- the banks and other institutional investors that bought them to lock in high yields. In the months to come, Deutsche Bank and at least one other member of the group of five, Goldman Sachs, began using subprime derivative contracts to bet the other way and guard against the possibility that subprime mortgages might default.
Lippmann Explains
For Lippmann's part, he says, it wasn't that he had ``any secret knowledge'' of the damaging events that were about to unfold in the U.S housing market. Rather, he says, he thought the risks of a downturn were significant enough to justify the millions of dollars it would cost to ``short,'' or wager against, subprime securities.
He says he told his bosses: ``If we're right, we're looking at a sixfold gain. And since a housing market slowdown is not as big a long shot as that, we should take the risk.''
Lippman disputes that the derivatives the group of five helped create -- which banks packaged into CDOs -- caused the subprime crisis.
``The problems in subprime are what they are and derivatives did not cause them,'' Lippmann says. ``Derivatives enabled more CDOs to be created and the stakes to be bigger. But the transparency made people realize the problem faster.''
Others see things differently. Derivatives, or ``synthetics,'' are ``like wearing a seatbelt that allows you to drive faster,'' says Rod Dubitsky, director of asset-backed research for Credit Suisse. ``The total dollar amount of losses, all these losses you're seeing, are from synthetics. No question, it changed the game dramatically.''
(Story originally published Dec. 17, 2007.)
To contact the reporter on this story: Mark Pittman in New York at mpittman@bloomberg.net
-
Permalink Reply by Kelly Crosby on
-
And how many of those people were prosecuted?
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on
-
You asked the right question. One all concerned citizens should be asking. Now we see the banks have shown what can happen when they push the envelope and 'greed' rules the roost. They gamble - create losses and come to the taxpayer for a bail out - wouldn't be great if you could go to Vegas lose a bundle and then ask the gov to take tax payer money and give you back your losses? or guarantee the casino that the taxpayer will guarantee the casino losses! It is all a big mess! As long as the financial players can collect interest, they are happy! Credit card companies will even give college students credit cards and only care about the interest payments and service charges for late payments they can make!
-
Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on
-
Ms. Crosby your question relating to how many were prosecuted echos and echos through my mind and undoubtedly thousands of others.
When I was a student at Cornell Law School back in the 70s one of my favorite Profs and indeed a favorite of most of our class was Professor G. Robert Blakey, the nation’s foremost authority on the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO).
Professor Blakey was selected to participate in the Attorney General’s Honors Program at the U.S. Department of Justice in 1960, and worked as a Special Attorney at the Department of Justice in the Organized Crime & Racketeering Section from 1960 to 1964. He also served as a professor of law and director of the Cornell Institute on Organized Crime at Cornell Law School (1973-80). He is currently The William and Dorothy O’Neill Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School.
Professor Blakey’s extensive legislative drafting experience resulted in the passage of the Crime Control Act of 1973, the Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1970 and the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, Title IX of which is known as “RICO”. He has been personally involved in drafting and implementing RICO-type legislation in 22 of the more than 30 states that have enacted racketeering laws.
The actions surrounding the nations financial collapse present fertile ground for RICO type investigation and possible prosecutions.
The point of prosecution under RICO was touched in the article titled:
What Cooked the World's Economy?
It wasn't your overdue mortgage.
By James Lieber
published: January 28, 2009 and excerpted below:
..........The basic story line so far is that we are all to blame, including homeowners who bit off more than they could chew, lenders who wrote absurd adjustable-rate mortgages, and greedy investment bankers.
Credit derivatives also figure heavily in the plot. Apologists say that these became so complicated that even Wall Street couldn't understand them and that they created "an unacceptable level of risk." Then these blowhards tell us that the bailout will pump hundreds of billions of dollars into the credit arteries and save the patient, which is the world's financial system. It will take time—maybe a year or so—but if everyone hangs in there, we'll be all right. No structural damage has been done, and all's well that ends well.
Sorry, but that's drivel. In fact, what we are living through is the worst financial scandal in history. It dwarfs 1929, Ponzi's scheme, Teapot Dome, the South Sea Bubble, tulip bulbs, you name it. Bernie Madoff? He's peanuts. [compared to what the American taxpayers are now on the hook for]
Credit derivatives—those securities that few have ever seen—are one reason why this crisis is so different from 1929.......
………..Imagine if a ring of cashiers at a local bank made thousands of bad loans, aware that they could break the bank. They would be prosecuted for fraud and racketeering under the anti-gangster RICO Act. If their counterparties—the debtors—were in on the scam and understood that they didn't have to pay off the loans, they could be charged, too. In fact, this scenario played out at subprime-pushing outlets of a host of banks, including Washington Mutual (acquired last year by JP Morgan Chase, which itself received a $25 billion bailout); IndyMac (which was seized by FDIC regulators); and Lehman Brothers (which went belly-up). About 150 prosecutions of this type of fraud are going forward......
The top of the swamp's food chain, where the muck was derivatives rather than mortgages, must also be scrutinized. ............lavishly compensated counterparties were willing participants and likewise could be considered for prosecution, depending on what they knew. Who were they?......
The American people should want to know the answer to your question.
Featured Discussion
Twitter Feed
© 2009 Created by PickensPlan
Badges | Community Guidelines | Report an Issue | Privacy | Terms of Service
