Overturning Bush Executive Orders
November 10th, 2008, 6:44 PM EST
Word is that the incoming Obama administration will act quickly to do things by executive order that can have an immediate effect on a number of issues.
- Obama himself has signaled, for example, that he intends to reverse Bush’s controversial limit on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, a decision that scientists say has restrained research into some of the most promising avenues for defeating a wide array of diseases, such as Parkinson’s.
- The new president is also expected to lift a so-called global gag rule barring international family planning groups that receive U.S. aid from counseling women about the availability of abortion, even in countries where the procedure is legal…
- The president-elect has said, for example, that he intends to quickly reverse the Bush administration’s decision last December to deny California the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles.
- Other early Obama initiatives may address the need for improved food and drug regulation and chart a new course for immigration enforcement, some Obama advisers say. But they add that only a portion of his early efforts will be aimed at undoing Bush initiatives.
Because not everything is regulated by Congress, which never legislated on stem cells, for example, a chief executive can make immediate changes in some areas by executive order. It will be nice to know that we’ll have a White House that recognizes that there is now something called science.
Hi Alan,
” It will be nice to know that we’ll have a White House that recognizes that there is now something called science.”
Science doesn’t produce future generations (like children, grandchildren, etc) unless you want them cloned.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Damn head. I have something all technical and verbose to say, but my head’s bothering me.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
You have all been deprived!
November 10th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico_City_Policy
November 10th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Wow, we get another “president of death”. This time instead of killing 1000s of terriest, its millions of babies.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Mr.Allen, My husband and I love you. Stay who you are 2012.
November 10th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Alan,
Embryonic stem cells are not about science. The are about cicumventing property rights and laws forbidding trading in human organic material for profit. Adult stem cells, ie. bone marrow, is illegal to sell for a profit (not htat profit is bad), additionally the doner has aurguable property interest in material developed and sold for profit. Stem cell harvested from destroyed fetuses are not currently covered under the law. You can sell materails developed from embryonice stem cells, you can’t from adult stem cells. Lets call a spad a spad.
November 10th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
spade a spade rather ;)
November 10th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Let the fun begin!!
November 10th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
F&B,
Given that:
a) Sex is fun
b) People like things that are fun
and
c) People REALLY like to have sex
I really don’t think ‘future generations’ are going to be a problem. I already have 3 kids.
November 10th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Whatever, Jim.
My view about science and reproduction is posted at the top.
November 10th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
The US government marches at last into the 21st century.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Only 9 years behind the rest of the world Rocky!
Cue the cheerleaders!
“We’re Number 2!”
“We’re Number 2!”
November 11th, 2008 at 1:03 am
Only one week since he became “President-elect” and Obama’s already a man on a mission.
Rock on!!!
November 11th, 2008 at 1:22 am
“Lets call a spad a spad”.
Actually, a SPAD might be called a Blériot.
November 11th, 2008 at 1:28 am
I know, Anonymouse. It’s hard to stifle a giggle while reading Rob’s earnest, yet error-ridden, post. After bastardizing words like:
cicumventing
doner
aurguable
materails
embryonice,
he catches himself and self-corrects only “Lets call a spad a spad.”
I’m not even addressing the grammatical errors.
I know, I know, no one’s perfect in spelling or speech. But oh, the huemannity!
November 11th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Obama is responsible for the recession said sean hannity! No No NO, it’s Bill Clinton’s recession. And he is afraid of being silence. To be fair he should silence himself.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Who is the real Sean Hannity.His views are so stupid. Stay away from Alan!
November 11th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
No, No, NO, Pierre, it’s Carter’s recession…Oh, wait, Truman’s….No, FDR’s…
November 12th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I watched the Hannity & Combs episode on FOX tonight, regarding new book by Alan’s wife. I disagree with her comment that child support should be not be lowered for men. (Though she should have said custodial parent as it could be a woman paying support). Support should be based on the child’s needs not income level. The Government does not come into married folks homes and say you make this much money, you must give this much to your kids. Child support should not be keep a custodial parents out of poverty (as Alan’s wife said). It should be basic needs and child care. If you don’t tell married families how much money to spend on kids based on income, then it should be the same for non married families. Also, what about when the custodial parent gets re-married? Not every custodial parent is single and eating out of a dumpster. The comment about Dad’s not spending as much time with the kids may be true in some cases, not most. I am very much as part of my kids life as my wife. Times have changed! We need to stop embracing a Farah Faucet movie view of the Deadbeat dad. Seems like Government agencies get income from this and need to perpetuate these views of a poor single mother to keep up NAZI like practices so they can keep there jobs. I am sure the family court lawyers love you!! As they are the folks that benefit from this the most. I hope your book addresses the need to get this family court cost issue under control so non-custodial parents have chance, since custodial parents in most cases can get a state attorney free of charge or the lawyers from child support are provided for free. Whether you agree with me or not about my views on support or that I believe parental time should always be split evenly unless there are special circumstances, I hope someone considers making the legal side fair for both parties. Even lawyers will tell you the system is very one sided. Let’s get make an even playing field for all. I hope the book is fair, and not just another liberal view of “deadbeats”, that father’s and fathers organizations cringe at because they gave you there time. Let’s stop allowing vengeance by the custodial parents with a vendetta to settle to waste tax dollars. (not that everyone is). Reward fathers that do spend a lot of time with their children more time.
November 12th, 2008 at 10:58 pm