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

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on March 10, 2009 at 12:33pm: Our President takes a stand!

Obama Looks to Limit Impact of Tactic Bush Used to Sidestep New Laws

WASHINGTON — Calling into question the legitimacy of all the signing statements that former President George W. Bush used to challenge new laws, President Obama ordered executive officials on Monday to consult with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. before relying on any of them to bypass a statute.

By CHARLIE SAVAGE
Published: March 9, 2009

WASHINGTON — Calling into question the legitimacy of all the signing statements that former President George W. Bush used to challenge new laws, President Obama ordered executive officials on Monday to consult with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. before relying on any of them to bypass a statute.

But Mr. Obama also signaled that he intended to use signing statements himself if Congress sent him legislation with provisions he decided were unconstitutional. He promised to take a modest approach when using the statements, legal documents issued by a president the day he signs bills into law that instruct executive officials how to put the statutes into effect. But Mr. Obama said there was a role for the practice if used appropriately.

“In exercising my responsibility to determine whether a provision of an enrolled bill is unconstitutional, I will act with caution and restraint, based only on interpretations of the Constitution that are well-founded,” Mr. Obama wrote in a memorandum to the heads of all departments and agencies in the executive branch.
Mr. Obama’s directions were the latest step in his administration’s effort to deal with a series of legal and policy disputes it inherited from the Bush administration. They came the same day Mr. Obama lifted restrictions Mr. Bush placed on federal financing for research that uses embryonic stem cells.

Mr. Bush’s use of signing statements led to fierce controversy. He frequently used them to declare that provisions in the bills he was signing were unconstitutional constraints on executive power, and that the laws did not need to be enforced or obeyed as written. The laws he challenged included a ban on torture and requirements that Congress be given detailed reports about how the Justice Department was using the counterterrorism powers in the USA Patriot Act.

Since the 19th century, presidents have occasionally signed a bill while declaring that one or more provisions were unconstitutional. The practice became more frequent with the Reagan administration, but it initially drew little attention.

That changed under Mr. Bush, who broke all records, using signing statements to challenge about 1,200 sections of bills over his eight years in office, about twice the number challenged by all previous presidents combined, according to data compiled by Christopher Kelley, a political science professor at Miami University in Ohio.

Many of Mr. Bush’s challenges were based on an expansive view of the president’s power, as commander in chief, to take actions he believes necessary, regardless of what Congress says in legislation.

The American Bar Association declared that such signing statements were “contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers,” and called on Mr. Bush and future presidents to stop using them and to return to a system of either signing a bill and then enforcing all of it, or vetoing the bill and giving Congress a chance to override that veto.

The Bush administration defended its use of signing statements as lawful and appropriate. And other legal scholars, while critical of Mr. Bush’s use of the device, said the bar association’s view was too extreme, because Congress sometimes passed important legislation that had minor constitutional flaws. They said it would be impractical to expect a president to veto the entire bill in such instances.

Mr. Obama’s approach may be geared to that kind of legislation. He issued the instructions as Congress was finishing up a huge omnibus spending bill filled with provisions that could affect presidential power, like requirements to get the approval of a committee before taking certain actions.

In his memorandum, Mr. Obama wrote, “Particularly since omnibus bills have become prevalent, signing statements have often been used to ensure that concerns about the constitutionality of discrete statutory provisions do not require a veto of the entire legislation.”

The Obama administration portrayed its approach as a major departure from that of Mr. Bush. But Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, disagreed, saying Mr. Obama was “wrong” to embrace the view that signing statements can be constitutionally legitimate.
“I think the Constitution is explicit as to how you handle these situations, and if the president thinks something is unconstitutional, then he ought to veto it,” said Mr. Specter, an outspoken critic of Mr. Bush’s signing statements.

He called the practice a “dodge” and “a disregard for the separation of powers and co-equal branches of government.”

“It’s just insulting,” Mr. Specter said, “and there is no reason why we can’t follow the Constitution even if it takes a few days more.”

But Robert S. Turner, a Reagan administration lawyer who has testified before Congress in support of signing statements, said he was pleased Mr. Obama was willing to use the device if he decided that signing a bill was in the national interest but that obeying part of it would be unconstitutional — including provisions that might amount to an “usurpation of presidential power.” Some bills, Mr. Turner argued, “are unvetoable,” because parts are urgently needed.

Mr. Obama’s directive was consistent with what he said in the 2008 presidential campaign, when he criticized Mr. Bush’s use of signing statements as an abuse. He said he would use them in a more restrained manner. By contrast, the Republican presidential nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, pledged never to issue a signing statement.

In his directive, Mr. Obama said any signing statement issued before his presidency should be viewed with doubt, placing an asterisk beside all of those issued by Mr. Bush and other former presidents.

“To ensure that all signing statements previously issued are followed only when consistent with these principles,” he wrote, “executive branch departments and agencies are directed to seek the advice of the attorney general before relying on signing statements issued prior to the date of this memorandum as the basis for disregarding, or otherwise refusing to comply with, any provision of a statute.”; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve at work on March 2, 2009 at 1:46pm: Dr. Young;
Interesting post and very presuasive if viewed from the progressive prospective only. But taken from the other side of the spectrum your "man of good heart and good intention" is merely another "big government communist trying to subjigate the American people." The man that I consider to be the best American president since George Washington, Abe Lincoln, used executive odered to imprison thousands of people during the Civil War with no legal process whatsoever. Many of these people died while imprisoned.Abe Lincon was a man of good heart and good intention but he used the executive orders in a horrible way. Didn't another good man with good intentions, FDR, use executive orders to imprison thousands of Japanese Americans during WW2.
My point is that no man, no matter how good his intentions, should be allowed such power over the people without checks and balances from the start.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on March 2, 2009 at 2:47pm: The constitution provides for the use of the Executive order. The worse abuses of the power of the office of the President came not from the use of the EO but from the silence of the American people and the American press and their fear of mad men who occupied the Oval office.

Review how Presidents used the EO from the 50s to the present. Also note it is a Constitutional Power written into the Constitution. Looks like we have to change the Constitution to prevent a President from using the EO. Review your history and you will see the most serious damage done to the American public and the world was at the hands of power drunk Presidents that fed off the weakness of a naive public.

Wall Street Bankers and slick hedge firms brought America's financial structure and the economy to its knees while idiots in D.C, were screaming and scaring the American people about enemy overseas - failing to see the enemy within. Pray this President and the congress and senate can put Humpty Dumpty back together again!

What the AMerican voters should have done is voted to keep Bush in office and made him clean up the mess he left for our children and grandchildren. Kindly read my new post.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve at work on March 3, 2009 at 11:57am: Dr. Young;
You can not have it both ways. Either the worst abuse came from the fear of the mad president or from the mad president himself. Presidents get power mad because of the almost total power they have including executive orders. No president should have this power and that includes our current president. I have no more problem with Obama having the excessive power than any other president.Lincoln should not have had it, FDR should not have had it, and Obama should not have it.

Probably the worst abuse of executive orders came from President Lincoln when he ordered every resident be removed from every county in Missouri that bordered on Kansas. Thousands of people were forced from their homes. Thousands were placed in concentration camps. Several hundred people, mostly the mothers, wives and children of Confederate soldiers were forced into a large wooden warehouse and then the warehouse burned to the ground.Among those killed were the families of the James brothers and the Younger brothers of bank robbing fame.

You see doctor I do know my history.I believe we should change the constitution to protect the American people from power mad presidents, or desperate presidents, or presidents with good hearts and good intentions that could way to easily do really stupid things. We need tha checks and balances that were not there to protect Jesse James's mother from a good man with good intentions.

The constitution would not allow Bush to remain as president and as big a mess as he made he would have lost to about anyone that ran against him. The idea is to fix the mess when we get the chance not to make the idiot that caused it to continue to mess it up.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on March 3, 2009 at 12:50pm: I am not having it anyway - you are missing the point.

It comes down to the American people sitting idly by and watching the mad men carry out their mad schemes. Jessie James, Ma Baker, John Dillinger all lived through the 'grapes of wrath' scenarios and saw the railroads or the banks take their farms - they murdered and robbed trains and banks because they had seen their family homesteads robbed -- they were made criminals - as some would argue. What do you have to say about what is going on today - bank foreclosures - drought wiping out farmers - What will the people do? The bank foreclosure - 'the dust bowl' caused one of the great Westward migrations. Where will the people migrate to now! I took Chavez to get migrant workers' their rights. I am sure you know the history of the poor white immigrants of Appalachia - and the coal regions - that were brutally exploited; or the workers in the early steel mills. At least they had the labor union movement!

Or let us review the most brutal period of American History - the period of chattel slavery when Africans and their Negro Black American descendants were treated as beasts of burden and cotton, tobacco and rice and sugar cane crops made the slave holding plantation owners and the south and America rich. Since you know history I know you are familiar with the phrase - King Cotton. Well, cotton was not the only crop made king because of free slave labor.

Where were the checks and balances then? Let us not forget the Native American - America's genocide - a genocide committed by the European immigrants who came to North America - I guess this genocide basically did not happen - so the history books would have our children think!

Reality check: the Constitution had to be amended to force racist government entities from the lowest level to the highest to give Negro Black Americans their full rights which by the way were in the Constitution. Plus various Executive Orders had to be issued to clarify specific Federal Laws that racist government entities continued to circumvent.

As we all know, government entities are controlled by people.

Reality check: the responsibility to correct wrongs lies with the people and when they fail or turn their back or act out of ignorance and hatred and greed then the worst happens, such as points you raise.

By the way click here and visit Born Again American. I think you will like this video.

The End; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Steve at work on March 4, 2009 at 1:00pm: Dr Young;

OK. I missed your point and you missed mine. For every good executive order there has been one equally bad. You mention the genocide of native Americans. It was an executive order by, I believe, Andrew Jackson that sent thousand of members of the civilized tribes in North Carolina and Tennessee on the trail of tears to Oklahoma.It was an executive order by Bush the younger that caused Gitmo to be turned into a prison with the abuses of the inmates. I could go on and on. I would not trust any man with the kind of power you are talking about unleashing on this country. We do not make changes in this way. We make real changes through compromise and legislation.

Loved the video. It needed Willie Nelson who has been standing up for the working man for years.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Dr. F. A. Young, Esq. on April 7, 2009 at 5:29pm: Has Executive Order 12631 Effectively Ended the Era of Free Markets?

Did you know that there is a mechanism in place to monitor, mitigate, and prevent financial crisis? It is called the Presidents Working Group on Financial Markets, or as Brett Fromson of the Washington Post coined The Plunge Protection Team. The Group was authorized by Reagan in 1988 by executive order 12631. It is a mysterious group. It doesn't have a spokesperson or keep minutes. There in fact seems to be no oversight whatsoever.

NY Magazine ran a short piece earlier this year as did the London Telegraph. The Telegraph called it a "black arts unit" with the authority to "support the markets in a crisis with a host of instruments, mostly through buying futures contracts on the stock indexes (DOW, S&P 500, NASDAQ and Russell) and key credit levers. And it has the means to fry "short" traders in the "hottest of oils."
It's pretty obvious that the Working Group drafted the emergency order set by the SEC today to ban short selling of 799 financial companies. The order is already causing an uproar and may end up doing more harm than good.

It's time for sensible oversight and regulation of our financial institutions. Nancy Pelosi has ordered hearings to investigate the causes of this financial crisis - she may want to start by subpoenaing the members of the Working Group. Enough of the secrecy and back room dealings that led to this financial debacle in the first place.

Executive Order 12631--Working Group on Financial Markets
Source: The provisions of Executive Order 12631 of Mar. 18, 1988, appear at 53 FR 9421, 3 CFR, 1988 Comp., p. 559, unless otherwise noted.
By virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish a Working Group on Financial Markets, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Establishment. (a) There is hereby established a Working Group on Financial Markets (Working Group). The Working Group shall be composed of:
(1) the Secretary of the Treasury, or his designee;
(2) the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or his designee;
(3) the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or his designee; and
(4) the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or her designee.
(b) The Secretary of the Treasury, or his designee, shall be the Chairman of the Working Group.
Sec. 2. Purposes and Functions. (a) Recognizing the goals of enhancing the integrity, efficiency, orderliness, and competitiveness of our Nation's financial markets and maintaining investor confidence, the Working Group shall identify and consider:
(1) the major issues raised by the numerous studies on the events in the financial markets surrounding October 19, 1987, and any of those recommendations that have the potential to achieve the goals noted above; and
(2) the actions, including governmental actions under existing laws and regulations (such as policy coordination and contingency planning), that are appropriate to carry out these recommendations.
(b) The Working Group shall consult, as appropriate, with representatives of the various exchanges, clearinghouses, self-regulatory bodies, and with major market participants to determine private sector solutions wherever possible.
(c) The Working Group shall report to the President initially within 60 days (and periodically thereafter) on its progress and, if appropriate, its views on any recommended legislative changes.
Sec. 3. Administration. (a) The heads of Executive departments, agencies, and independent instrumentalities shall, to the extent permitted by law, provide the Working Group such information as it may require for the purpose of carrying out this Order.
(b) Members of the Working Group shall serve without additional compensation for their work on the Working Group.
(c) To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of funds therefore, the Department of the Treasury shall provide the Working Group with such administrative and support services as may be necessary for the performance of its functions.; ▶ Reply to This