Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (311)	8/3/1998 12:38:00 PM
From: Zoltan!	Respond to of 13994

Thank you and the same to all the others, especially those that contacted Jill and Bob.

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (311)	8/3/1998 6:36:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Remember, EO13083 has only been suspended. It has not been killed. Clinton's assault on the Constitution Oakland Tribune Monday, August 03, 1998 Randy Hamilton THE U.S. House of Representatives adjourns for its summer recess on Aug. 7. Purely by coincidence, of course, one week later without fanfare, publicity or the press releases and hooplah usually accompanying presidential executive orders, President Clinton's assault of federalism and local self-government becomes effective via Executive Order 13083. It repeals President Reagan's new federalism EO 12612 and authorizes massive intrusion into state and local affairs by federal bureaucrats. Clinton's order reverses many current central government policies about federalism. It pays only lip service to the framework set out in the Constitution, which is premised on a system of checks and balances and a division of power between Washington and the rest of the country: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people." American federalism not only preserves individual liberty, but by guaranteeing state authority, it provides an essential balance to the enormous appetite for power and more power by Washington. Clinton's order instructs federal bureaucrats to meddle whenever they think they have more "expertise" and resources to regulate matters than the states or when they decide "States would be reluctant to impose necessary regulations." All hail the mighty brain power that resides only inside the beltway. Section 3 of EO 13803 sets out what the White House believes justifies federal usurpation of state and local affairs ("Federalism Policy-making Criteria"). It would be difficult to write more ambiguous, vacuous criteria destructive of federalism: "When decentralization increases the costs of government." "When States would be reluctant to impose necessary regulations because of fears that regulated business activity will relocate to other states." "When placing regulatory authority at the State or local level would undermine regulatory goals because of high costs; or demands for specialized knowledge or expertise will effectively place the regulatory matter beyond the resources of State authorities." "When the matter relates to Federally owned or managed property or natural resources, trust obligations or international obligations." And who decides when states are too dumb to act properly? Federal bureaucrats. And who decides when decentralization, which is the strength of federalism, is too costly? Federal bureaucrats. And who decides when he has more expertise than those incompetent state or local officials? Federal bureaucrats. And who decides when a federal agency "may limit the policy-making discretion of the state and local governments"? Federal bureaucrats. Clinton's executive order is a gross distortion of the language of the founding fathers. Nowhere in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights is there any language that would even remotely justify replacement of lawful state and local regulatory policies by unelected federal employees. EO 13083 has no provision for congressional oversight or authorization. If, for sound public policy reasons particular to a state it "would be reluctant to impose necessary regulations," the EO gives a bureaucrat overlord, not Congress, the power to impose his view of what is "necessary," thus overturning the decisions of state and local officials in both the legislative and executive branches of their governments. Scholars of constitutional government and the rule of law are dumbfounded by President Clinton's order. Congress should reject this treading on the Constitution. They should make it clear that the executive order is a serious affront to the federalist framework established in the Constitution. President Clinton's version of federalism makes individuals and their duly elected state and local officials more subservient to 2 million anonymous federal bureaucrats. The Founding Fathers' version, in contrast, limits the power of the central government over the lives and liberties of the people and state and local governments. CLINTON'S order establishes guidelines that undermine the foundations of federalism and local self-government by legitimizing unnecessary and possibly unconstitutional national regulatory powers and actions without the benefit of authorizing congressional legislation. It grants enormous power to the central government by executive order because Congress would never approve such sweeping federal authority. Executive Order 13083 creates loopholes in present laws, policies and programs through which the executive branch can march an army of federal regulators trampling on the rights and responsibilities of states, local government and the people. Randy Hamilton is visiting scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California, Berkeley. He lives in Oakland. freerepublic.com