Granting President emergency Internet power

TechPro · Post by **TechPro** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:08 am

Senators propose granting President emergency Internet power

While I *think* I can understand the reason for wanting some ability to take action when action is needed ... To me, this sounds like it has some rather troubling possibilities.

Discuss...

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:24 am

They don't even say what these powers will be other than some exceedingly vague \"shut down stuff\" part. I don't like the sound of it at all.

AlphaDoG · Post by **AlphaDoG** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:25 am

Sounds like a bit of an overreach to me!

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:54 am

I understand China has similar powers.....

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:03 am

woodchip wrote:I understand China has similar powers.....

so do Hugo Chavez and Ahmadinejad

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:25 am

If everyone stopped using a certain OS *cough* the reasoning behind such proposals wouldn't hold water.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:03 pm

Lindows?

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:25 pm

Krom wrote:They don't even say what these powers will be other than some exceedingly vague "shut down stuff" part. I don't like the sound of it at all.

The precedent already set by the current majority is "We need to pass the law so we can show you what is in it..."
So don't bother to bend over people, they will stick it to you just like you are, anywhere, anytime, because 'we need to rebuild this great nation into something else'

Heretic · Post by **Heretic** » Sun Jun 13, 2010 7:59 am

Isaac wrote:If everyone stopped using a certain OS *cough* the reasoning behind such proposals wouldn't hold water.

I don't think that a certain OS is the reason it is all about control even if you use Linux you could be shut down from using the internet.

The top ten host systems on the net as of April 1999

I know it's dated

1.Linux
2.Windows 95/98/NT
3.Solaris/SunOS
4.BSD Family
5.IRIX
6.Mac/Apple
7.AIX
8.HPUX
9.Reliant Unix/Sinix
10.Novell Netware

http://www.leb.net/hzo/ioscount/index.html

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:56 am

Im trying to figure out why the president can't already do this in an emergency.

flip · Post by **flip** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 5:40 pm

Executive Order 12919, \"the President would put the United States under total Martial Law and Military Dictatorship.\" [2]

The following EOs all fall under EO 12919: [8]

* EO 10990: \"allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.\" [9]
* EO 10995: Federal seizure of all communications media in the US.
* EO 10997: Federal seizure of all electric power, fuels, minerals, public and private.
* EO 10998: Federal seizure of all food supplies and resources, public and private and all farms and equipment.
* EO 10999: Federal seizure of all means of transportation, including cars, trucks, or vehicles of any kind and total control over all highways, seaports and water ways.
* EO 11000: Federal seizure of American people for work forces under federal supervision, including the splitting up of families if the government so desires.
* EO 11001: Federal seizure of all health, education and welfare facilities, both public and private.
* EO 11002: Empowers the Postmaster General to register every single person in the US.
* EO 11003: Federal seizure of all airports and aircraft.
* EO 11004: Federal seizure of all housing and finances and authority to establish forced relocation. Authority to designate areas to be abandoned as 'unsafe,' establish new locations for populations, relocate communities, build new housing with public funds.
* EO 11005: Seizure of all railroads, inland waterways and storage facilities, both public and private.
* EO 11051: Provides FEMA complete authorization to put above orders into effect in times of increased international tension of economic or financial crisis (FEMA will be in control incase of 'National Emergency').

* EO 12919 \"Apparently Allows Cabinet Heads to Make Direct Loans to Government Contractors.\" [10]

E.O. 10995 President Kennedy: Seizure of all communications media and suspension of First Amendment rights.

They already have that power.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 5:50 pm

I can't see the need for any part of the government to have such gargantuan powers. And it seems more than a little unrealistic anyway..

flip · Post by **flip** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 5:56 pm

Another point I'd like to make. If anyone here remembers that more than a few senators said \"they were threatened with martial law if they didn't sign the new stimulus bill\". Well THESE executive orders are exactly what they were talking about.

Heretic · Post by **Heretic** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:10 pm

Flip you might want to check out E.O. 11556 Which revoked the E.O 10995. Signed by Nixon Which in turn E.O. 11556 was revoked by EO 12046 Signed by Carter.

First off we need to stand up against the abusive powers of Executive Orders for they are not Constitutional.

Executive Orders have two main functions: to modify how an executive branch department or agency does its job (rule change) or to modify existing law, if such authority has been granted to the President by Congress. Executive orders are not mentioned by the Constitution, but they have been around a long, long time. George Washington issued several Presidential Proclamations, which are similar to EO's (Proclamations are still issued today). EO's and Proclamations are not law, but they have the effect of statutes. A typical modern Proclamation might declare a day to be in someone's honor. Historically, they have had broader effect, such as the Emancipation Proclamation. A typical EO might instruct the government to do no business with a country we are at war with. Executive orders are subject to judicial review, and can be declared unconstitutional. Today, EO's and Proclamations are sequentially numbered. The average president issues 58 EO's a year. As of March 13, 1936, all EO's must be published in the Federal Register. The first to have been so published was #7316, by President Roosevelt.
Thanks to Richard Barr for the idea.

http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#execord

flip · Post by **flip** » Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:25 pm

HEH yeah it's abusive and confusing to say the least. Now:

Flip you might want to check out E.O. 11556 Which revoked the E.O 10995. Signed by Nixon Which in turn E.O. 11556 was revoked by EO 12046 Signed by Carter.

Does that mean that Carter's EO which rescinded Nixon's EO effectively reestablishes Kennedy's EO.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:39 pm

Heretic wrote:First off we need to stand up against the abusive powers of Executive Orders for they are not Constitutional.

If the president can't issues orders, then how would the executive branch of the government do anything?

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:57 pm

By getting Congress to agree with him. Our Government was setup exactly that way to keep any one branch form having to much say so.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Jun 16, 2010 3:56 pm

Too bad Obama didn't EO the oil spill problem.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:26 pm

EOs have to be given within existing law…they can’t create a new law.

AlphaDoG · Post by **AlphaDoG** » Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:09 pm

flip wrote:By getting Congress to agree with him. Our Government was setup exactly that way to keep any one branch form having to much say so.

Congress doesn't have anything to do with the Executive Branch. In a perfect world they would always be at odds with each other.

Spidey" wrote:EOs have to be given within existing law…they can’t create a new law.

See?

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Jun 16, 2010 7:26 pm

In a perfect world they would always be at odds with each other.

Not saying I disagree with you AD because I also feel the very same way. That would keep them from doing too much damage.

Yet my point was more along the lines of the Executive branch being 1/3 of our government in total, checks and balances , you know all that jazz.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 10:57 am

Those checks and balances have always been there. Executive orders are consequence of the constitution, not a contravention.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:29 pm

E.O. 11921 President Ford: Grants Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to take control over all production and distribution, energy sources, wages and salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions during any national emergency, and Congress cannot review the action for six months.

You don't think that including this terminology \"Congress cannot review the action for six months\" effectively circumvents checks and balances. What is your answer to members of congress actually being threatened with this very action if they didn't sign the \"presidents\" stimulus bill? Is that not a form of extortion, being forced to choose between the lesser of 2 evils, just because an EO, made at the whim of one man, gives him that bargaining power? What do you say of the one that \"suspends the bill of rights\"? You are a lot more trusting than I am I guess. All Hail the King, err president.

fliptw · Post by **fliptw** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:10 pm

Congress can review it any time it wanted to. Hell if someone felt it over-reached they could take it to the Supreme Court.

As Spidey pointed out earlier, EO are not law, and executive orders have been struck down by the Supreme Court for treading into making law.

Checks and balances by in sit idle, someone has to put the effort to start them if they feel its needed.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:19 pm

What is your answer to members of congress actually being threatened with this very action if they didn't sign the \"presidents\" stimulus bill? Is that not a form of extortion, being forced to choose between the lesser of 2 evils, just because an EO, made at the whim of one man, gives him that bargaining power?

What about this?

AlphaDoG · Post by **AlphaDoG** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:40 pm

As I understand EOs, they only apply to the executive branch of government.

Wiki wrote:An executive order in the United States is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government. In other countries, similar edicts may be known as decrees, or orders-in-council. Executive orders may also be issued at the state level by a state's Governor or at the local level by the city's Mayor. U.S. Presidents have issued Executive Orders since 1789, usually to help officers and agencies of the Executive branch manage the operations within the Federal Government itself.

The President can NOT force law on the populace, all he may do is compel federal workers under his direct supervision to comply with his idea of social justice.

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:03 pm

I can see everyone's points I guess, but let's put this in another perspective. What about the day after 9/11 or had our economy actually collapsed? People are not exactly in their right frame of mind after incidences like that. With those kind of words being thrown around by the Commander In Chief, who's gonna stop him during a disaster.
I also think it's a very strong point that I made that at the time of the financial crisis, just because of an existing EO that states the president could take over all finances in this country, and that congress couldn't even review the action for 6 months is significant. I mean could congress go ahead and review it? Yes, of course they could. Would the Supreme Court over rule it? More than likely. But just because of it's existence, and at the very moment of truth, nobody wanted to open that can of worms. Who wanted to debate whether he had that power in that moment, while we hung in the balance. They could have resisted, then he could have fought back, the whole time our country went down the drains. So many of them, just because of an existing EO felt forced to go ahead with a plan they felt was maybe more harm than help just because the last thing we needed at that time was a war between the branches.
Can not anyone see how that at least manipulates the whole process?

flip · Post by **flip** » Thu Jun 24, 2010 8:27 am

United States Executive Order 9066 was a United States presidential executive order signed and issued during World War II by U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on February 19, 1942 ordering Japanese Americans to internment camps.

Native born American citizens of Japanese descent were rounded up and stripped of their constitutional rights, made to give up their homes and livelihoods. They were then housed in concentration camps, surrounded by barbed wire and guard towers. Anyone that tried to escape was shot dead.

Sorry so late to post. A lightning strike took out my modem, motherboard and dog. He survived but he's deaf as a doornail now =/.

Granting President emergency Internet power

Granting President emergency Internet power

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: