ANOTHER PIECE OF THE PUZZLE
Bending the Executive Branch
By Bradley Cook
RUSSIAN President Boris Yeltsin and U.S. President Bill Clinton have more in common than simply being the primary players in the global game of nuclear chess. They are also the most powerful men within their respective systems of government. Both of these systems allow their presidents to issue decrees and executive orders that can have the force of law, and both men can declare a state of emergency, imprison civilians, seize property, suspend their respective constitutions and declare martial law.
Two events in Europe last month received little attention despite their great significance. In May, the Council of Europe, a broadly consultative body that Russia joined in 1996, issued a report warning that Yeltsin's wide powers could in "cases of abuse" lead the country to a "presidential dictatorship," according to an Agence France Press report. Also in May, while Clinton was in Birmingham, England, attending a meeting of the Group of Eight economic powers, he signed Executive Order 13083 which fundamentally alters U.S. federalism.
Federalism is the division of power between the states and the federal government as established by the U.S. Constitution. That division of power has radically increased the grasp of the federal government and the president as a result of order 13083, according to excerpts of the order published last week by Worldnet Daily, an electronic publication.
The executive order Clinton signed in England lists nine kinds of issues that would justify unilateral federal action. The legal means by which Clinton's government successfully extends its reach are in vaguely worded passages that can affect everything from trees to casinos.
What's amazing is that at the same time Clinton is in Europe quietly drafting legislation for more presidential power back in the United States, the Council of Europe issues a "potential presidential dictatorship in Russia" warning because Yeltsin's powers are "too broad."
When Yeltsin makes a law without consultation, advice or consent of the legislative or judicial branch he is roundly and rightly criticized. Witness the response to the Russian president's 1994 "Decree on the Struggle Against Crime and Corruption," which allowed for "suspects" to be incarcerated without being told why - a decree that made news worldwide. But when Clinton prepares the legal work to defend martial law in the United States by signing Executive Order 12919 - which he did in 1994 - the American media, with few exceptions, ignores it. Clinton has issued more executive orders than any president in U.S. history, yet most people remain in the dark about them. An archive search of The New York Times' articles for the last year failed to find a single mention of "executive order," for example.
Similarly, but more alarming still, the president can declare a national emergency and the Clinton-appointed Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) would then be invested with the power to suspend the Constitution and take control of the government. With the stroke of a pen, Clinton could activate executive powers laid down in the 1933 War Powers Act and order FEMA to seize all communication facilities, power supplies, food supplies, airports, transportation of any kind, seaports, waterways and highways - and Congress cannot even debate the president's declaration for half a year. There are even provisions for quartering civilian labor forces without regard to financial remuneration, and the registration of all citizens for the purposes of control of population movement and relocation.
You think it can't happen in the United States? It happened to thousands of Japanese-Americans during World War II, and Clinton exercised the option in 1995. After Hurricane Opal, FEMA declared martial law in parts of Florida and citizens were put under house arrest.
Clinton can do it again for "any threat to national security, perceived or real." One example of a threat that could activate the War Powers Act is the breakdown in the national "cyber infrastructure." The Millennium Bug that has the world's computer programmers scrambling to fix it before the year 2000 is exactly the kind of cyber breakdown that might call for martial law. Senator Robert Bennett, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Special Committee on the year 2000 problem recently asked the Department of Defense if the military would be ready "in the event of a Y2K-induced breakdown of community services that might call for martial law?"
Under Russia's Constitution, Yeltsin too could declare martial law if the Millennium Bug posed an immediate threat to Russia by instigating a computer-induced breakdown of communications, electrical supplies, satellites or nuclear missiles. The difference is that Hurricane Opal gave Clinton a try-out of the martial law contingency plan, which senators say might be necessary, while the Russian Nuclear Power Ministry has decided that they'll "deal with the problem in the year 2000."
times.spb.ru |
