For Editorial and Discussion use only:
In a personal interview with WorldNetDaily, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, expressed his belief that the extensive number of executive orders issued by President Clinton are unconstitutional.
Although he agreed that many presidents have issued a large number of executive orders, Sen. Hatch complained that the ones issued by President Clinton create law, while circumventing the legislative process. He said a legal challenge should be made to stop the practice and reverse some of the orders.
"Well, a huge number of his executive orders are excessive and unwise," Sen. Hatch explained to WorldNetDaily.
"Under the Constitution, the president has the right to issue executive orders, but they have to be tested in court if you want to prove that they are excessive or unwise. You know, Reagan issued a lot of executive orders too, but they were not like these. In other words, they didn't make laws all the time. I think many of his (Clinton's) could be found unconstitutional," said Hatch, himself a presidential candidate.
"Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kind of cool," was the statement made by White House communications counsel Paul Begala in July 1998. He was talking about the ease with which President Clinton was able to create law virtually unchallenged using executive orders and presidential directives.
The ability to make law as a dictator without the normal checks and balances of the U.S. Constitution is what Sen. Hatch was complaining about. Congress has the exclusive function of lawmaking, but presidents have taken some of that power, and Congress has not done anything to prevent it.
Presidential executive orders and directives were initially intended to be a means for the efficient operation of the executive branch, according to Sen. Hatch. Now, through craftiness and political intimidation, Clinton has avoided the Congress and creates law with the "stroke of the pen."
Presidents have always been granted broad discretion when it comes to matters of national security. Along with that comes secrecy. The courts and Congress have not objected. Secrecy is considered to be a vital part of national security. For a president who is abusive of his power and authority, this provides the perfect excuse to classify as secret any executive order or directive that he does not wish to have scrutinized.
The Congress has no idea what is actually contained in classified documents, and therefore there is absolutely no oversight or accountability. The potential for abuse is enormous, and it could be undetected for many years. Each presidential abuse of power leads to more when a president discovers he can create any law he wants with the "stroke of the pen."
The topics of national security, national emergency, and top-secret classification all came into play when President Clinton signed Presidential Decision Directive 25 in 1994. That document has been requested by numerous members of Congress, and all have been turned down.
All that is available is an executive summary. Excluded from the summary is the portion which sources claim describes the use of the U.S. military as a domestic police force during a national emergency. More than one source familiar with the actual document has independently confirmed the claims.
The executive summary also makes clear that the U.S. can place military forces under the command of a foreign commander as part of a United Nations peace force. PDD 25 is said to specifically permit a foreign commander to rule over U.S. troops, even on U.S. soil, "when doing so serves American security interests," according to one military source.
It appears that President Clinton took a major step in his grab for power on Dec. 10, 1998, when he enacted Executive Order 13107 at a time when Congress was out of town and unlikely to take action or even notice. That order gives the president the ability to enact treaties without the constitutional requirement of Senate ratification with a two-thirds majority vote.
EO 13107 could be argued as justification for the president to implement U.N. treaties without approval of the Senate, which literally dissolves the sovereignty of the U.S. It sets up the Interagency Working Group to oversee legislation proposed by the president to make sure it is in conformity with U.N. initiatives, handle public relations to educate the public about such issues, and evaluate future needs in order to comply with U.N. human rights initiatives.
President Clinton laughed when he learned the nation's governors and mayors objected to Executive Order 13083 on federalism. States' rights were being attacked, and they rallied to the cause. President Clinton appeared to back down when he agreed to suspend the order, but he knew that all he had to do to reactivate it would be to sign another piece of paper. The apparent capitulation by the president caused the governors to ease pressure on him, but according to Sen. Hatch, the president recently reissued the order in a reworded form that is just as dangerous.
Asked if there is still a problem with federal vs. states' rights Sen. Hatch said, "Yes we do, but they've been making headway."
President Clinton does not hesitate to write law wherever he sees fit. When Congress did not take the action the president wanted on the tobacco issue, he quickly signed an executive order in 1995 which declared nicotine to be an addictive drug and authorized the Food and Drug Administration to establish regulations.
In the same year he signed an executive order to financially bail out the country of Mexico. Congress saw fit to make a few speeches in opposition to the move, but no effort was made to stop him.
The actions illustrate Clinton's willingness to circumvent Congress and the legislative process whenever he wishes. "Stroke of the pen. ..."
Bmp.
Well now........if I were clinton the next executive order I would sign, if not already done in secret, would be the "Emergency Conditions Under Which The President of the United States May Disband Congress".
Hatch is a great talker and terrible doer.
BS. It indicates Congress's willingness to go along. Bunch of spineless concubines
The actions illustrate Clinton's willingness to circumvent Congress and the legislative process whenever he wishes. "Stroke of the pen. ..."
It also illustrates Congress' UNwillingness to even attempt to stop him. They have the power to undo these E.O.'s but not the cojones to stand up to him. FBI files?
Correct - Hatch and the rest of his fellow spineless Republicans in the Senate have only to look to themselves for the Impeachment debacle, leaving the Traitor-In-Chief in office.
Well now........if I were clinton the next executive order I would sign, if not already done in secret, would be the "Emergency Conditions Under Which The President of the United States May Disband Congress".
Clinton already signed and renewed that Executive Order some time ago. It's on the books, sitting there waiting. Basically, it says that in the case of terrorism by "weapons of mass destruction," clinton can rule the country through FEMA and dispense with congress and the courts. Plus the deputy head of FEMA is one of clinton's old procurers from the Arkansas State Police.
I haven't seen reference to this particular Emergency Order posted here recently, but it has been posted here and discussed in the past.
It presumably isn't a coincidence that the clintonoids so often use that phrase, "weapons of mass destruction," when talking about Saddam Hussein and terrorism. It's a legal or technical term of art, relating to that particular emergency executive order.
Go away Orrin,just go away!This clown is competing with clintoon for the "Im in your face everyday award".
Since it was the Democrats that kept the him in office, and not the Republicans .....
Oswald-Booth, party of two, your table is ready. Yes, as you requested, over-looking the Rose...............
bump
Talk is cheap. Hatch and the rest of the republiweenies speak loudly and carry a wet noodle. They are bunch of pathetic whiners who will do nothing.
No wonder the media ignores them.
Obviously, the Democrats in congress, with the exception of one or two, are despictable Socialist and Clinton enablers. But the actions of the Senate, who the Republicans are supposed to control, in the impeachment process was deplorable, leaving the House Managers hanging, and was an insult to their fellow Republicans in the House. I blame Republican 'leaders' in the Senate for abdicating their oversight responsibility over the most criminal and corrupt administration in US history. I blame them for not having the guts, spine, patriotism, and principle to do the right thing, instead of playing politics and 'bipartisanship.'
I for one am tired of listening to Hacth and others like him. They say one thing and do another. Lets see them take a stand and stick with it. Weather they go down in the fight or not! Until then there words are without meaning.
Could someone remind Hatch that he is part of the problem.
The Legislative Branch is just a bunch of old posers.
They've abrogated much of their power and now we have a President who is a penstroke away from dictator,
troops all over the world, and debt up to here to a bunch of bankers.
Thanks for nothing Hatch
On another thread with the same topic, someone gave the reference for a Supreme Court case on Executive Orders. Just found the Supreme Court case-- Youngstown Co. v. Sawyer (1952).
//laws.findlaw.com/US/343/579.html
Okay, I gotcha! Can't executive orders be rescinded? It's to bad that power corrupts and that we can't seem to find anyone in this nation who can stay uncorruptable. It seems to be a disease that affects those that we elect. The Charleston School board is a prime example. Also, backbiting, backscratching etc. Our elected officials do not seem to have the welfare of thier constituents at heart, only their own welfare and the welfare of their pocketbooks.
It's too bad that power corrupts and that we can't seem to find anyone in this nation who can stay uncorruptable. It seems to be a disease...
What about your Senator Graham?
I took a shine to him during the impeachment and the "trial". What was the quote?
"Where I come from, anyone calling somebody at two o'clock in the morning, is up to no good".
A simple truth. The president was up to no good!
Is Lindsey for real?
Or will he break our hearts too?
No doubt deadman.
When Hatch stops talking and starts doing I'll listen.
How does Hatch manage to be the LAST PERSON ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH to speak out about anything? Every single time?
" Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kind of cool."
It is not law of the land.
The Supreme Court, in the 1952 case about Truman's EO to take over the steel mills, had some interesting comments. [case noted above--Youngstown Co. v. Sawyer]
"The president's power, if any, to issue the order must stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself."---
"In the framework of our Constitution, the President's power to see that the laws are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be the lawmker. The Constitution limits his functions in the lawmaking process to the recommending of laws he thinks wise and vetoing the laws he thinks bad. And the Constitution is neither silent nor equivocal about who shall make the laws the President is to execute. " --
"It is said that other Presidents without congressional authority have taken possession of private business enterprises in order to settle labor disputes. But even if this is true, Congress has not lost its exclusive constitutional authority to make laws necessary and proper to carry out powers vested by the Constitution. "
It was mentioned that "Congress has taken no action," in response to Truman's letter to Congress telling what he was doing--it did not matter.
Agreed, but don't you think we need more than "one voice in the wilderness"
I believe that the concensus of opinion about Graham was that he was to good to be true, a goody two-shoes. It may just be that people don't recognize integrity, self respect, and respect for others when they see it anymore.
Old fashioned values that should be taught in every home across the land, but are considered to be to archaic and out of date.
Manners, values, courtesy, consideration for others, respect (for others as well as yourself) should be taught from day one. We must teach discipline to our children and show them by thought word and deed that some parameters are good and others are meant to be stretched and worked around. But it is up to us, the parents and extended family to guide them.
It sure was nice of Sen. Hatch to take time out of his busy schedule of overturning these "unconstitutional" executive orders to give this interview. It's a wonder that Sen. Hatch finds the time to let AG Reno from that pesky DoJ stroke his ego.
Hatch is an embarrassment to the Republican party and the citizens of Utah. They should replace him in the next election with someone who cares about how the current administration has undermined our government. As to him running for President, I still laugh every time I think about it. He really takes himself seriously doesn't he?
"Okay, I gotcha! Can't executive orders be rescinded?"
The good news is that a future President can rescind/modify any or all EO's from a predecessor. The bad news is if Algore or Bradley gets there. Congress CAN deny funding to EO's, rendering some of them meaningless.
Orrin is a joke; big talk, little do. He's probably working on confirming the next batch of Clintoon judicial nominees.
[
Top
|
Last
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |