The Continued Rise of the Executive: Joe Biden — the 46th
“I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus.”
The first seven days of Joe Biden’s presidency has set the tone for what I believe to be a façade of normalcy while executive power is flexed behind the veil. That is not to constitute as an accusation of corruption. As of now I feel that at face value the administration will appear to preach equity and virtue signal while policy and action indicates an aggressive expansion of executive overreach. The former will be praised by the public while the latter will generally not reach public concern. I fear the general population has no qualm with the precedent to be set.
Exercising Executive decree begins in the first several hours on day one, when President Biden moves to forcefully terminate a top-ranking lawyer at the National Labor Relations Board. Lawyer, Peter Robb, was meant to guard against unfair labor practices for private-sector workers. Initially, the general counsel was asked to resign. Robb refused, citing the action being in violation of long-standing political practice to respect the sovereign elements of the independent agency. Upon pushback, the dismissal of the lawyer proceeded. Legal experts speculate of an opportunity for legal challenge regarding the President’s decision. The first action by Biden represents his willingness to trespass beyond norms to please his constituents and begins the momentum for what is yet to come. In this case the measure was taken in loyalty to unions. Robb was considered a champion to private market freedom and a threat to those workers. Biden’s actions then seem ironic, given the mid-week axing of the Keystone Pipeline project. Citing his allegiance to the climate community…. at the expense of tens of thousands in union labor. I am unsure this is violating any norm per say. I would just call it bad politics. I am hesitant to make this speculation, but I wonder if this represents a shift in Democrat leadership valuing its climate lobbyists over the union lobbies. It could be possible that this climate vote represents a larger targeted demographic in the voting base. Geopolitically, the Keystone Pipeline pullout led to Justin Trudeau publicly commenting his “disappointment.” I consider the action by The President to be mostly symbolic in nature. We know this certainly was not a choice based on moral values. The Keystone Pipeline itself presents an opportunity to invest in an infrastructural project running net-zero carbon emissions and will be powered entirely by renewable energy by 2030. This makes the pipeline a healthier alternative to the demands of dirtier energy sources in Venezuela or other Open Nations. Regardless of turning cheek to the climate-friendly alternative. Joe Biden thankfully has preserved his base at the expense of his union supporters and the rest of the Country. The climate vote was sealed when Biden returned the country’s commitment to the Paris Climate Accord. An action legally requiring consent of Congress given its status as a treaty. The President did not feel it necessary to run its course through his Democrat controlled Congress. Closing the week, the topic of vaccination planning hits the news cycle. In this instance the administration committed to 100 million vaccines in the first 100 days. Reporters challenged him with the counterpoint that the country was already operating at the rate of one million per day. Which happened to be true. To which, Biden replied “Give me a break, man.” A pleasant gaslighting to the American people. Fortunately for him, the MSM will continue their soft inquiries to Jen Psaki and avoid pressing further on the vaccination plan. Has the president spent more time furthering his agenda than improving the plan to fight the pandemic? We the people, may never know.
The first week of 46 displays an imminent threat in my eyes. Presenting a leader who is willing to flex power for the pleasure of constituents without any regard to overstepping boundaries or the costs of the trade-off. The first seven days ended with thirty-seven executive orders WITH a Democrat Senate AND House. Voters should be rising in scrutiny to a President who presides executive order over top of his “Coequal” branches of government who also happens to be on the same team (indicating no threat to dead on arrival bills). For what purpose should the President be exercising this power if that is the case? For perspective, Donald Trump had four, Obama had 5, and W. Bush with 0 executive orders in the first week. At this point I think we should refer to Joe Biden’s quote from 2020. Take a minute… I feel now Americans should more than ever be aware of the existing threat of Unitary Executive Theory. Given that threat, scrutiny of the executive branch should be at an all-time high. Especially, in the wake of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021. Joe Biden has a history supporting executive overreach into private matters and in some cases also weaponizing institutions for political gain. This starts in a 1995 when (then) Senator Biden introduced the Omnibus Counter terrorism Act (proposal), the bill was heavily ridiculed by The New York Times as a potential threat to various civil liberties. Within this bill was provisions to allow the government to operate in the shadows while targeting private citizens whom they believed a threat. Fast forward to a post 9/11 world where sentiment for The Patriot Act remained strong. Significant pieces of this bill were taken from Biden’s 1995 counter-terrorism bill and was overall influenced by it. To which he boasted about publicly. This is the same bill which the ALCU characterized as making everyone a suspect as the bill heavily expanded on executive trampling of civil liberties and surveillance measures. Giving the government access to private internet records, banking history, phone records, and much more information. So much for a Constitution consisting of negative rights to protect us from our government. Hardly surprising given Biden’s prior service under Obama. Which received heavy criticism when routine phone tapping of private citizens was revealed. Remember that this is the same administration that was not foreign to weaponizing institutions for political means. For example, using the IRS to target conservative organizations, DOJ seizing Associated Press phone/email records, and HHS leveraging groups to name a few. To say Joe Biden has dabbled in trampling civil liberties is an understatement. Tulsi Gabbard elaborates this perspective by showing concern for the ways in which the administration chooses to define what is and what is not a threat. She asks “What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life? Where do you take this?” The vague nature of the bill leaves an undue responsibility on the current administration to define what is a threat and what is not. As we have seen, The President is likely to launch political crusades with no moral basis for the sole purpose of retaining his base’s support. A risky precedent to set to say the least.
In conclusion, we now see momentum being created to propel us into a direction that a portion of citizens are genuinely concerned of. We know this administration and the mainstream media intends to portray a sense of normalcy and virtue signal with their symbolic motions. Behind closed doors lie the executive overreach looking to fulfill its agenda with no costs in mind. I see no limits to move past checks and balances of power with no shame in doing so. All while the MSM turns a blind eye — like media sentiment during the Obama Admin. I think left leaning thinkers must remember that the pendulum will swing back eventually and will unfortunately follow the precedent being set or react in a much more aggressive way. I stand concerned for a real threat of civil liberties in the presentation of the new domestic terror bill and how it may reach minimal scrutiny in a Democrat controlled House and Senate. At this point does it matter? When we have a leader willing to enact legislation himself among the same party in a coequal branch. Is Joe Biden as he describes himself… a dictator? It is important to remember this is not a “right and left” issue. It is an executive power issue. If public sentiment constantly praises or accepts the expansion of executive power, we can expect half the country to feel disenfranchised for the rest of our existence.
