Executive Order 13603

[Nobunaga]

You guys know about this?

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/co ... thing-else

It's a conservative site, so take that into consideration, but the text from the body of the order is clear enough, even without the commentary.

Obama claims this authority for the executive branch based on .... ?

Help me out.

[Metsfanmax]

You might start with the article itself.

Like Obama’s EO, Clinton’s EO also claims its authority from the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA) and its subsequent amendments. In fact, Congress has given successive presidents plausible (albeit illegitimate) constitutional cover for over six decades by regularly reauthorizing the DPA. The most recent example of this bi-partisan congressional complicity in establishing the basis for executive dictatorship is the Defense Production Act Reauthorization of 2009.

Therein one finds almost verbatim much of the wording of Obama’s EO 13603 that justifiably alarms so many people. The Defense Production Act Reauthorization of 2009 was introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) on September 16, 2009.

[Nobunaga]

You might start with the article itself.

Like Obama’s EO, Clinton’s EO also claims its authority from the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA) and its subsequent amendments. In fact, Congress has given successive presidents plausible (albeit illegitimate) constitutional cover for over six decades by regularly reauthorizing the DPA. The most recent example of this bi-partisan congressional complicity in establishing the basis for executive dictatorship is the Defense Production Act Reauthorization of 2009.

Therein one finds almost verbatim much of the wording of Obama’s EO 13603 that justifiably alarms so many people. The Defense Production Act Reauthorization of 2009 was introduced by Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) on September 16, 2009.

You're missing my point. But that's OK. This much power vested in the hands of one man, hell, it's like living in a monarchy/dictatorship (depending on your outlook). Can the DPA be defended, constitutionally? Hell, I don't know, but I very much doubt it. I will do some research on this.

[Phatscotty]

Presidents have way too much power these days. My understanding of our history is that power has swayed back and forth from Legislative to Executive, that is until Woodrow Wilson laid the ground work for something much bigger, and FDR blew it wide open. Reagan scaled it back a tad, but over the lat 100 years, Executive power has become closer and closer to Monarch/dictator status, not further away. Consider all the "emergency" powers from the past that are automatically renewed every year, and used in ways that have absolutely nothing at all to do with their original purpose. I'm sure there were some goals involved...

Now we are at the point where Congress votes something down, and the president just issues executive orders anyways. I like power in the hands of Congress, because they are far more reflective of the people.

[Juan_Bottom]

Well, Adams said that congress was designed to be corrupted periodically, and that the president was supposed to be able to enforce the will of the people over that corruption.


We've been talking about this. Voter ID blocks minority votes. And the Republicans also used dirty tactics this past election, like closing voting locations in minority communities, closing poll stations early in Democratic communities, using purge lists, and having super-long lines that take hours. Obama said last year that he wouldn't interfere in the voting process because of state's rights, and dirty politicians used that to try to cheat voters. We can't just stand by and allow some states to decide that black people aren't allowed to vote anymore unless they wait 11 hours in line.

If you don't think people should have to submit to a background check and show ID to buy a gun, then don't complain about this, America. Last election there was virtually no voter fraud reported.

[warmonger1981]

Juan Bottom wrote.... Last election there was virtually no voter fraud reported.


I think Andy Stern ,President of SEIU, was one of the most visited persons to the White House. I also think SEIU was in charge of maintaining all voter election machines. Would that make a difference this time around compared to the Acorn days of voter fraud if true? Just what I've heard.

[Juan_Bottom]

Acorn didn't commit any fraud. They were cleared 2 years later.

The short answer is yes.
It's possible since the machines are proprietary, and election overseers don't have to be neutral. That means some states can and do have a Republican or a Democrat in charge of their entire state's secret voting technology.
The longer answer is that there is no evidence of any electronic voter fraud. In several states there were issues with e-voter machines malfunctioning and switching votes, but that was a software issue that was corrected wherever it occurred. In the Gore-Bush race there were also issues with machines in Georgia turning off wherever temperatures went over 75 degrees. Which is silly.

example

But yeah, I'd fight electronic voting machines wherever they are, UNLESS they have a printable voting receipt that shows who you voted for. I love those.
I'd also fight placing outdated and confusing punch-type machines in poor districts as well. But receipts are all-important.

[Woodruff]

Presidents have way too much power these days. My understanding of our history is that power has swayed back and forth from Legislative to Executive, that is until Woodrow Wilson laid the ground work for something much bigger, and FDR blew it wide open. Reagan scaled it back a tad, but over the lat 100 years, Executive power has become closer and closer to Monarch/dictator status, not further away. Consider all the "emergency" powers from the past that are automatically renewed every year, and used in ways that have absolutely nothing at all to do with their original purpose. I'm sure there were some goals involved...

Now we are at the point where Congress votes something down, and the president just issues executive orders anyways. I like power in the hands of Congress, because they are far more reflective of the people.

While I agree with that, quite clearly it is Congress itself which is handing that power over to the President each time they ratify the thing.

[warmonger1981]

Paper reciepts are essential quite literally. Mark Ricci I think is in charge of elections in Minnesota and one of his top officials was charged with fraud. Multiple votes in 9 years if I'm correct. I would find story but too lazy. Maybe later. Thanks for clear up JB.