This Is The List of Every Current National Emergency And It Is A Nightmare For Dems
The mainstream media is promoting the idea that declaring a national emergency is some unprecedented move by President Donald Trump.
But the fact is that many national emergencies have been declared since the act to allow them has been in place.
https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/...KenmGArCGU
There seems to be a general trend in those executive orders. In fact, there are only 4 orders from that list that don't deal with general sanctions or weapons exports.
March 1, 1996 – Declaration of a National Emergency and Invocation of Emergency Authority Relating to the Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels (Proclamation 6867) – Implemented following the destruction of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban military on 24 February 1996.
September 14, 2001 – Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Proclamation 7463) – The first of two national emergencies declared following the September 11 attacks, allowing the president to call troops from the National Guard or from retirement, to apportion military funding, to exercise more discretion over hiring military officers, and to promote more generals than previously allowed.
May 22, 2003 – Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest (Executive Order 13303) – Granted the Development Fund for Iraq, established the same day, legal protection in the wake of the invasion of Iraq and amidst the Iraq War.
February 15, 2019 – Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States – Allocates funding to build a wall on the southern border of the United States, which the president stated is “a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics.”
If you can't see that Trump's order is distinctly different from the others, you have your head buried in the sand. Trump's order is the only one of these that is actively circumventing congress to deal with a problem. The others were all generally approved by congress, or at the very least, weren't opposed. This is opening Pandora's box. Climate change is the EXACT same thing in that it could be considered a threat to America. If he is allowed to set this precedent, it will be expanded upon in the future.
Admittedly, I am out of my wheelhouse regarding the specifics of these executive orders. I had to google several of them to understand their scope, so there is a possibility I am missing something. I typically have only ever paid attention to EO's if I thought they were unconstitutional. Please enlighten me if I am wrong. That said, nothing I have seen convinces me this is a healthy use of executive orders.
(02-18-2019, 08:52 AM)Last42min Wrote: [ -> ]There seems to be a general trend in those executive orders. In fact, there are only 4 orders from that list that don't deal with general sanctions or weapons exports.
March 1, 1996 – Declaration of a National Emergency and Invocation of Emergency Authority Relating to the Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels (Proclamation 6867) – Implemented following the destruction of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban military on 24 February 1996.
September 14, 2001 – Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Proclamation 7463) – The first of two national emergencies declared following the September 11 attacks, allowing the president to call troops from the National Guard or from retirement, to apportion military funding, to exercise more discretion over hiring military officers, and to promote more generals than previously allowed.
May 22, 2003 – Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest (Executive Order 13303) – Granted the Development Fund for Iraq, established the same day, legal protection in the wake of the invasion of Iraq and amidst the Iraq War.
February 15, 2019 – Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States – Allocates funding to build a wall on the southern border of the United States, which the president stated is “a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics.”
If you can't see that Trump's order is distinctly different from the others, you have your head buried in the sand. Trump's order is the only one of these that is actively circumventing congress to deal with a problem. The others were all generally approved by congress, or at the very least, weren't opposed. This is opening Pandora's box. Climate change is the EXACT same thing in that it could be considered a threat to America. If he is allowed to set this precedent, it will be expanded upon in the future.
Admittedly, I am out of my wheelhouse regarding the specifics of these executive orders. I had to google several of them to understand their scope, so there is a possibility I am missing something. I typically have only ever paid attention to EO's if I thought they were unconstitutional. Please enlighten me if I am wrong. That said, nothing I have seen convinces me this is a healthy use of executive orders.
What does an national emergency in the terms of climate change look like?
Here is the problem with liberals, and not implying you are one, but they think the United States is the world.
(02-18-2019, 08:52 AM)Last42min Wrote: [ -> ]There seems to be a general trend in those executive orders. In fact, there are only 4 orders from that list that don't deal with general sanctions or weapons exports.
March 1, 1996 – Declaration of a National Emergency and Invocation of Emergency Authority Relating to the Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels (Proclamation 6867) – Implemented following the destruction of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban military on 24 February 1996.
September 14, 2001 – Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Proclamation 7463) – The first of two national emergencies declared following the September 11 attacks, allowing the president to call troops from the National Guard or from retirement, to apportion military funding, to exercise more discretion over hiring military officers, and to promote more generals than previously allowed.
May 22, 2003 – Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest (Executive Order 13303) – Granted the Development Fund for Iraq, established the same day, legal protection in the wake of the invasion of Iraq and amidst the Iraq War.
February 15, 2019 – Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States – Allocates funding to build a wall on the southern border of the United States, which the president stated is “a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics.”
If you can't see that Trump's order is distinctly different from the others, you have your head buried in the sand. Trump's order is the only one of these that is actively circumventing congress to deal with a problem. The others were all generally approved by congress, or at the very least, weren't opposed. This is opening Pandora's box. Climate change is the EXACT same thing in that it could be considered a threat to America. If he is allowed to set this precedent, it will be expanded upon in the future.
Admittedly, I am out of my wheelhouse regarding the specifics of these executive orders. I had to google several of them to understand their scope, so there is a possibility I am missing something. I typically have only ever paid attention to EO's if I thought they were unconstitutional. Please enlighten me if I am wrong. That said, nothing I have seen convinces me this is a healthy use of executive orders.
For clarification, this is only a list of currently active National Emergencies. You would need to Google the Clinton and Bush National Emergency E.O.s on immigration to get a direct comparison and precedent for Trump’s action.
(02-18-2019, 10:22 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 08:52 AM)Last42min Wrote: [ -> ]There seems to be a general trend in those executive orders. In fact, there are only 4 orders from that list that don't deal with general sanctions or weapons exports.
March 1, 1996 – Declaration of a National Emergency and Invocation of Emergency Authority Relating to the Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels (Proclamation 6867) – Implemented following the destruction of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban military on 24 February 1996.
September 14, 2001 – Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Proclamation 7463) – The first of two national emergencies declared following the September 11 attacks, allowing the president to call troops from the National Guard or from retirement, to apportion military funding, to exercise more discretion over hiring military officers, and to promote more generals than previously allowed.
May 22, 2003 – Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest (Executive Order 13303) – Granted the Development Fund for Iraq, established the same day, legal protection in the wake of the invasion of Iraq and amidst the Iraq War.
February 15, 2019 – Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States – Allocates funding to build a wall on the southern border of the United States, which the president stated is “a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics.”
If you can't see that Trump's order is distinctly different from the others, you have your head buried in the sand. Trump's order is the only one of these that is actively circumventing congress to deal with a problem. The others were all generally approved by congress, or at the very least, weren't opposed. This is opening Pandora's box. Climate change is the EXACT same thing in that it could be considered a threat to America. If he is allowed to set this precedent, it will be expanded upon in the future.
Admittedly, I am out of my wheelhouse regarding the specifics of these executive orders. I had to google several of them to understand their scope, so there is a possibility I am missing something. I typically have only ever paid attention to EO's if I thought they were unconstitutional. Please enlighten me if I am wrong. That said, nothing I have seen convinces me this is a healthy use of executive orders.
For clarification, this is only a list of currently active National Emergencies. You would need to Google the Clinton and Bush National Emergency E.O.s on immigration to get a direct comparison and precedent for Trump’s action.
And how many times did Bush or Clinton go golfing at their private resort the day after declaring a national emergency?
(02-18-2019, 10:28 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 10:22 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]For clarification, this is only a list of currently active National Emergencies. You would need to Google the Clinton and Bush National Emergency E.O.s on immigration to get a direct comparison and precedent for Trump’s action.
And how many times did Bush or Clinton go golfing at their private resort the day after declaring a national emergency?
Did either own a resort? Did Clinto have time to vacation with Whitewater, ethics probes, and um, cigars? You mean the media didn’t document and bastardize their every move? Go figure.
Oh no, Russian collusion:
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world...ranch.html
I’m having trouble trying to understand your point here. Was there are reason to not include Obama on your list? I mean he did declare 13 National Emergencies with 11 still active. We also know how he liked to “get away.”
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/zoe...undraising
[url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world/meanwhile-back-at-the-ranch.html][/url]
(02-18-2019, 09:14 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 08:52 AM)Last42min Wrote: [ -> ]There seems to be a general trend in those executive orders. In fact, there are only 4 orders from that list that don't deal with general sanctions or weapons exports.
March 1, 1996 – Declaration of a National Emergency and Invocation of Emergency Authority Relating to the Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels (Proclamation 6867) – Implemented following the destruction of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban military on 24 February 1996.
September 14, 2001 – Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Proclamation 7463) – The first of two national emergencies declared following the September 11 attacks, allowing the president to call troops from the National Guard or from retirement, to apportion military funding, to exercise more discretion over hiring military officers, and to promote more generals than previously allowed.
May 22, 2003 – Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest (Executive Order 13303) – Granted the Development Fund for Iraq, established the same day, legal protection in the wake of the invasion of Iraq and amidst the Iraq War.
February 15, 2019 – Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States – Allocates funding to build a wall on the southern border of the United States, which the president stated is “a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics.”
If you can't see that Trump's order is distinctly different from the others, you have your head buried in the sand. Trump's order is the only one of these that is actively circumventing congress to deal with a problem. The others were all generally approved by congress, or at the very least, weren't opposed. This is opening Pandora's box. Climate change is the EXACT same thing in that it could be considered a threat to America. If he is allowed to set this precedent, it will be expanded upon in the future.
Admittedly, I am out of my wheelhouse regarding the specifics of these executive orders. I had to google several of them to understand their scope, so there is a possibility I am missing something. I typically have only ever paid attention to EO's if I thought they were unconstitutional. Please enlighten me if I am wrong. That said, nothing I have seen convinces me this is a healthy use of executive orders.
What does an national emergency in the terms of climate change look like?
Here is the problem with liberals, and not implying you are one, but they think the United States is the world.
Congrats on missing the point.
(02-18-2019, 10:54 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 09:14 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]What does an national emergency in the terms of climate change look like?
Here is the problem with liberals, and not implying you are one, but they think the United States is the world.
Congrats on missing the point.
Congrats on neglecting to clarify or emphasize the point. Folks want to try and make and apples to apples comparison using a banana, so his question seems fair.
(02-18-2019, 11:24 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 10:54 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]Congrats on missing the point.
Congrats on neglecting to clarify or emphasize the point. Folks want to try and make and apples to apples comparison using a banana, so his question seems fair.
I thought so to. Thank you.
I would love Cleatwood to clarify what a national emergency on climate change looks like. No liberal can answer the question of how you will get China and India to cooperate.
(02-18-2019, 10:52 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 10:28 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]And how many times did Bush or Clinton go golfing at their private resort the day after declaring a national emergency?
Did either own a resort? Did Clinto have time to vacation with Whitewater, ethics probes, and um, cigars? You mean the media didn’t document and bastardize their every move? Go figure.
Oh no, Russian collusion: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world...ranch.html
I’m having trouble trying to understand your point here. Was there are reason to not include Obama on your list? I mean he did declare 13 National Emergencies with 11 still active. We also know how he liked to “get away.”
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/zoe...undraising
[url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world/meanwhile-back-at-the-ranch.html][/url]
Just forgot about Obama, like I'm sure we'd all like to (zero sarcasm).
It just seems to me that if a problem is serious enough as to merit a national emergency declaration, you'd probably want to stay at work over the weekend rather than playing golf with your buddies. How serious of an emergency does it take to get a sitting President to cancel his tee time?
Were any of the national emergencies in that list declared to circumvent Congress's refusal to fund a project dear to the President at the time?
(02-18-2019, 11:33 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 10:52 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]Did either own a resort? Did Clinto have time to vacation with Whitewater, ethics probes, and um, cigars? You mean the media didn’t document and bastardize their every move? Go figure.
Oh no, Russian collusion: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world...ranch.html
I’m having trouble trying to understand your point here. Was there are reason to not include Obama on your list? I mean he did declare 13 National Emergencies with 11 still active. We also know how he liked to “get away.”
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/zoe...undraising
[url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world/meanwhile-back-at-the-ranch.html][/url]
Just forgot about Obama, like I'm sure we'd all like to (zero sarcasm).
It just seems to me that if a problem is serious enough as to merit a national emergency declaration, you'd probably want to stay at work over the weekend rather than playing golf with your buddies. How serious of an emergency does it take to get a sitting President to cancel his tee time?
You also wouldn't say "I don't have to do this" if it wasn't an emergency.
(02-18-2019, 11:29 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 11:24 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]Congrats on neglecting to clarify or emphasize the point. Folks want to try and make and apples to apples comparison using a banana, so his question seems fair.
I thought so to. Thank you.
I would love Cleatwood to clarify what a national emergency on climate change looks like. No liberal can answer the question of how you will get China and India to cooperate.
His point had nothing to do with liberals but with the fact that if Trump declares this a national emergency, it opens the door to declare just about anything one. Including climate change if the next president chooses to.
He’s opening Pandora’s Box.
(02-18-2019, 09:14 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 08:52 AM)Last42min Wrote: [ -> ]There seems to be a general trend in those executive orders. In fact, there are only 4 orders from that list that don't deal with general sanctions or weapons exports.
March 1, 1996 – Declaration of a National Emergency and Invocation of Emergency Authority Relating to the Regulation of the Anchorage and Movement of Vessels (Proclamation 6867) – Implemented following the destruction of two civilian aircraft by the Cuban military on 24 February 1996.
September 14, 2001 – Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks (Proclamation 7463) – The first of two national emergencies declared following the September 11 attacks, allowing the president to call troops from the National Guard or from retirement, to apportion military funding, to exercise more discretion over hiring military officers, and to promote more generals than previously allowed.
May 22, 2003 – Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq Has an Interest (Executive Order 13303) – Granted the Development Fund for Iraq, established the same day, legal protection in the wake of the invasion of Iraq and amidst the Iraq War.
February 15, 2019 – Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States – Allocates funding to build a wall on the southern border of the United States, which the president stated is “a major entry point for criminals, gang members, and illicit narcotics.”
If you can't see that Trump's order is distinctly different from the others, you have your head buried in the sand. Trump's order is the only one of these that is actively circumventing congress to deal with a problem. The others were all generally approved by congress, or at the very least, weren't opposed. This is opening Pandora's box. Climate change is the EXACT same thing in that it could be considered a threat to America. If he is allowed to set this precedent, it will be expanded upon in the future.
Admittedly, I am out of my wheelhouse regarding the specifics of these executive orders. I had to google several of them to understand their scope, so there is a possibility I am missing something. I typically have only ever paid attention to EO's if I thought they were unconstitutional. Please enlighten me if I am wrong. That said, nothing I have seen convinces me this is a healthy use of executive orders.
What does an national emergency in the terms of climate change look like?
Here is the problem with liberals, and not implying you are one, but they think the United States is the world.
Yes, you need cooperation from the rest of the world to properly address climate change.
They could declare an emergency anyways though. I don't think the question, "will your plan work?" is supposed to come up in discussing "is this an emergency?" If emergency powers are invoked, and the courts say the President is allowed to invoke emergency powers whenever he feels like it, we have to let whoever our leader is implement their plan for whatever emergency they see. Doesn't matter if it's a good plan. You short circuit congressional deliberation, you get what you get.
(02-18-2019, 11:33 AM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 10:52 AM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ]Did either own a resort? Did Clinto have time to vacation with Whitewater, ethics probes, and um, cigars? You mean the media didn’t document and bastardize their every move? Go figure.
Oh no, Russian collusion: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world...ranch.html
I’m having trouble trying to understand your point here. Was there are reason to not include Obama on your list? I mean he did declare 13 National Emergencies with 11 still active. We also know how he liked to “get away.”
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/zoe...undraising
[url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/28/world/meanwhile-back-at-the-ranch.html][/url]
Just forgot about Obama, like I'm sure we'd all like to (zero sarcasm).
It just seems to me that if a problem is serious enough as to merit a national emergency declaration, you'd probably want to stay at work over the weekend rather than playing golf with your buddies. How serious of an emergency does it take to get a sitting President to cancel his tee time?
What work is he neglecting? He stayed put all during the holiday and shutdown to no avail. Money already exists, construction plans exist, agencies have their marching orders, etc. Congress is on break for the week so grandstanding is postponed.
(02-18-2019, 12:01 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 11:29 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]I thought so to. Thank you.
I would love Cleatwood to clarify what a national emergency on climate change looks like. No liberal can answer the question of how you will get China and India to cooperate.
His point had nothing to do with liberals but with the fact that if Trump declares this a national emergency, it opens the door to declare just about anything one. Including climate change if the next president chooses to.
He’s opening Pandora’s Box.
That isn’t how it works. That is the issue around here with folks latching on to MSM obstructionist and hypocritical fear mongering. And once again, this isn’t the first President to utilize the congressionally approved process and statutes involved in declaring a National Emergency. In fact, even as it pertains to immigration.
So the question remains...What does a climate change National Emergency look like? Federal court precedents and applicable statutes supporting the Pandora’s Box ridiculousness would be welcomed.
#becausetrump
(02-18-2019, 01:30 PM)B2hibry Wrote: [ -> ] (02-18-2019, 12:01 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]His point had nothing to do with liberals but with the fact that if Trump declares this a national emergency, it opens the door to declare just about anything one. Including climate change if the next president chooses to.
He’s opening Pandora’s Box.
That isn’t how it works. That is the issue around here with folks latching on to MSM obstructionist and hypocritical fear mongering. And once again, this isn’t the first President to utilize the congressionally approved process and statutes involved in declaring a National Emergency. In fact, even as it pertains to immigration.
So the question remains...What does a climate change National Emergency look like? Federal court precedents and applicable statutes supporting the Pandora’s Box ridiculousness would be welcomed.
#becausetrump
A climate change national emergency looks like shutting down every one of our countries plants that produce fossil fuels, taxing the bejesus out of people who use automobiles or homes run on fossil fuels, putting millions of people out of work, and lessening our stance globally as an exporter of fossil fuels.
That is what it looks like. Can you say.... civil war?
They won't need a national emergency. The EPA is enough.
Democrats can and will use this in the future. JJ, you are too smart to defend this. I understand what Trump is doing. I understand the problem he is facing. I don't think this is the right solution, and in (x) amount of years when you're watching this be expanded by a progressive President, claiming it's not apples to apples, everyone is going to point to your defense of this position and use whataboutism.
Allowing the President to circumvent congress for something that is a problem (but not an emergency) is going to backfire in the long run. There is no EMERGENCY at the border. There is a slow leak, that causes problems and costs tax payers money. If the citizens don't like that, they should elect new officials. They should no roll over and contribute to the ever increasing powers of the President. I hope the SC strikes this down, because that's the best case scenario to prevent future abuse.
One more thing: I was in the military. They need that housing budget.