Exeuctive Order 13776: Crime Reduction

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13776 is entitled "Task force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety".  It was issued on February 9th, 2017 and has 3 sections.

Section 1

This section defines a policy to reduce crime.

Section 2

This section creates a Task force.  The Attorney General will figure out the details and the budget will come from the Justice Department.  The taskforce will meet at least annually and will submit a report annually.  The goals of the taskforce are stated in subsection (c) and these include proposing legislation which would improve public safety and reduce crime as well as identify improvements for crime related data.

Section 3

This section has the necessary fine print to assure the constitutionality of the EO.

My Commentary

The specific issues raised in the policy section include illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and violent crime.  None of these are really what they seem and frankly this EO is entirely demagoguery and simply a political play.
Illegal immigration, especially with regards to immigrants from Mexico as well as immigrants who are Muslim are represented as groups that are almost entirely evil throughout the President's election campaign.  Here again they are being represented the same way.  However, there was some evidence that was presented during the campaign that immigrants often have lower crime rates than a control group of "Americans".  Granted the act of staying in the US without valid papers is in fact against the law, but this question of what to do with the estimated 10 million illegal immigrants is something that Congress must resolve in the end but mass deportations or incarcerations is not going to work.
With regards to drug trafficking, the country is in the midst of an opioid epidemic that was largely created by way of legally prescribed narcotics.  The resolution to the problem is not going to be enforcement as this will not get addicts to go clean.  The removal of the demand for illegal drugs will stop the trafficking.  Removal of the demand will come from treatment and education, not enforcement.  And yet, based on statements and documents leaked around August 1st, the focus of the Attorney General was to try to roll back the legalizations of marijuana that have occurred over the past several years.  But the Task Force, per leaked documents, did not recommend the path that the Attorney General wanted to pursue.
Violent crime is a reference to Chicago.  The murder rate in Chicago is extreme and very sad.  Outside of a few urban areas, the violent crime rates are at historic lows.  However, there is a political need to have the populace afraid so advertising how bad the violent crime rate in the worst areas is necessary.  As to solutions, I don't have any to offer, this is a complicated and difficult situation and will not be solved by a slogan from either the left or the right.  There will be hard work required by the authorities in conjunction with civil groups such as charities, foundations and religious organizations and the timeframe will be years before any real successes could be celebrated.
Here is an update I found on the web.

Executive Order 13814: Additional Emergency Powers

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13814 is entitled "Amending Executive Order 13223".  It was published on October 20th, 2017 and has 2 sections.

Preamble

This EO has a somewhat lengthy and also notable preamble which provides rationale for delegation of Presidential Authority because of the ongoing immediate threat of attacks on the United States.

Section 1

This section amends Section of EO 13223, which is entitled "Ordering the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces To Active Duty and Delegating Certain Authorities to the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Transportation".  EO 13223 was issued on September 14th, 2001, that is, 3 days after the terrorist attacks in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington DC.  This adds that in addition to what has been previously delegated, sections 688 and 690 of title 10 of the United States Code.

Section 2

This section includes the necessary legal fine print to ensure the constitutionality of the EO.

My Commentary

So what is going on here is that 688 and 690 USC 10 have provisions that limit the number of retirees that can be called back to active duty unless there is a national emergency.  Essentially, this EO links the 9/11 terrorist attacks as the justification (a declared "national emergency") to be able to pull back retirees to active service.  What this seems to be indicative of is that there is an insufficient number of people who are in the armed forces and that the armed forces are preparing measures to ensure that they can obtain a suitable number of personnel in case of something going wrong in any of the flash points currently in the world such as North Korea, Iraq or Iran.
This does not appear to be good news.

Executive Order 13777: Enforcing the Regulatory Agenda

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13777 is entitled "Enforcing the Regulatory Agenda".  It was published on February 24th, 2017 and it has 6 section

Section 1

This section states the policy succinctly regarding unnecessary regulatory burdens.

Section 2

In Subsection (a), each agency will name a Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO) who is charged with implementing this EO as well as EO's 13771, 12866 and 13563.  Subsection (b) states the RRO reports to the agency head.

Section 3

This section creates Regulatory Reform Task Forces which are unless designated otherwise, are headed by the RRO.  The Task Force attempts to identify regulations that can be eliminated.  Further, the Task Force shall report within 90 days on the progress towards the stated goals of reducing regulation.

Section 4

This section states that the goals in 3(g) are to be tracked and that these goals are to be included in performance indicators and where possible performance reviews.

Section 5

This section allows for agencies to be granted a waiver from the requirements of this EO based on the fact that they do not issue many regulations.

Section 6

This section includes the necessary legal fine print to ensure the constitutionality of the EO.

My Commentary

So, fundamentally, the question at hand is what is the reason why we have rules?  The argument goes like this: Enforced rules provide for known behavior.  Known behavior provides for certainty.  Certainty provides for planning.  Planning allows for achievement of goals that take a lot of people or a lot of time.  Being able to achieve goals that are bigger than one person allows complex societies to exist since it is impossible for one person to build an electric grid, a road network, a sewage treatment plant or a food distribution system.
Let's ignore for the moment questions around rule breakers.  Creating a rule is done with an intended consequence in mind.  Good faith disagreement with a rule can come in two flavors.  First, there is disagreement with the intended consequence.  In this case, it is a policy debate often motivated by personal or organization goals which may or may not benefit society as a whole or beliefs which may or may not be scientifically provable.  Second, there is agreement with the intended consequence, but disagreement that the rule is the best rule to achieve the intended goal.  For example when someone argues that the rule also had bad unintended consequences.
There can also be bad faith disagreement with the rule.  This can happen when a rule is proposed to close a loophole and those who have taken advantage of it lobby to stop passage of the rule.  Of course the previous statement is fraught with opinion and prejudice.
Complexity adds opportunity for gaming the system.  So from a sense that, if done correctly, regulatory reform (and here, I interpret reform to mean deletion of a bunch of old rules) can be a good thing since it should eliminate ways to game the system.  However, there is an expectation that this EO and the regulatory reform it is promoting is disguising a project to remove rules that prevent corporations and wealthy individuals from doing things that result in a private benefit and simultaneously a public cost.  The classic example is dumping waste into a river rather than paying for proper disposal.
In the recent news have been stories of large swaths of rules in the Department of Education being revoked.  These rules deal with the requirements for handling disabled students and also regarding how to deal with accusations of sexual discrimination and harassment.

Executive Order 13778: Waters of the US Rule

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13778 is entitled "Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the "Waters of the United States" Rule."  It was published on February 28th, 2017 and it has 4 sections

Section 1

This section makes a statement about policy.  It is trying to state that there needs to be a balance between protecting the environment while at the same time relaxing the rules so as not to stifle economic activity.

Section 2

This section directs that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency needs to review the rule previously published in 2015 regarding the definition of "Waters of the United States".  Similarly, if other Executive Branch agencies have made rules in line with this, these need to be reviewed and then modified to ensure that they do not stifle economic activity.  Finally, since there is on-going litigation around this rule, if the rules are changed, the Attorney General is to be notified so that the Department of Justice can take a revised legal position in cases in which they are involved.

Section 3

This section directs the EPA to use a definition of "Navigable Waters" that was defined in a written opinion of Supreme Court Justice Scalia.  If memory serves, this was a minority opinion, but in line ideologically with Republican policies.

Section 4

This section includes the legal fine print necessary to ensure the constitutionality of the EO.

My Commentary

This was one of the landmark Executive Orders aimed at reversing Obama's signature policies and fulfilling a campaign promise.  The details are subtle and at the time this was issued, many media outlets had to put together explainers on why it mattered.  Fundamentally, it will have an effect to lessen the protections against pollution and exploitation of waterways in the United States.  Typically, it will be larger corporations that would be able to take advantage of the revision of the rules that will be the implementation of this EO.  However, as always, there is a process and it will take time before the effects will be seen.

Executive Order 13813: Healthcare

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13813 is entitled "Promoting Healthcare Choice and Competition Across the United States".  It was issued on October 12, 2017 and has 7 sections.  This intends to implement some amount of roll-back on the ACA healthcare legislation.

Section 1

This section outlines some problems with the individual health care market as it currently stands and uses this as justification to direct agencies to address through regulation 3 specific strategies to make the insurance market better for consumers: Association Health Plans (AHP's), Short-term, limited-duration insurance (STLDI) and heath reimbursement arrangements (HRA's).

Section 2

This section directs the Secretary of Labor to propose regulations to allow more employers to form AHP's.

Section 3

This section directs the Secretaries of Labor, Treasury and Health and Human Services to propose regulations to expand STLDI.

Section 4

This section directs the Secretaries of Labor, Treasury and Health and Human Services to propose regulation that would permit greater use of HRA's.

Section 5

This section affirms that the public will have an opportunity to provide public comment on any regulations that are going to be proposed as a result of this EO.

Section 6

This section calls for a report in 180 days and then every 2 years thereafter to advise what actions can be taken by government to further the policy aims described in section 1.

Section 7

This section includes the legal fine print to assure that it is constitutional.

My commentary

In reality, I don't think the President needed to issue an Executive Order to have the mentioned Secretaries propose regulations and revise guidance.  He could have just sent them an email.  And this policy direction could have been launched on January 21st, 2017 if the transition team had really been prepared in any way.  So overall this EO was issued just for the ratings.  Ultimately, the details of the new regulations and guidance will matter.  Critics were quick to jump up and propose scenarios that will likely make the situation worse for many people, especially those that can least afford to buy insurance.
It is often debated on whether health care is a right.  But I am coming to the conclusion that framing the question in this way is causing the question to be converted into something that goes along the lines of "how much of my money should be spent on people who can't afford to pay for services that  are necessary to keep them alive?"  Taxes are collected so that "public" money can be spent on public goods.  Public goods are things that to a lesser or greater degree benefit everyone.  Infrastructure, law enforcement, fire protection services, national parks are all examples of public goods that most people generally agree are reasonable things to collect taxes to create.  Maintaining the health of the population is a public good.  The argument for government involvement, whether it is a single payer system or some other form of participation, should focus on the public good that it will provide which can be shown from countless CDC studies.  And don't get me started on the false binary choices in which many debates on healthcare get framed.

Executive Order 13779: Historically Black Colleges and Universities

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13779 is entitled "White House Initiative to Promote Excellence and Innovation at Historically Black Colleges and Universities" and was issued on February 28th, 2017.  It has 5 sections.

Section 1

This section outlines the rationale why this EO was written.

Section 2

This section establishes a White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU's).  This initiative will be led by the Department of Education.  This initiative's goals are to strengthen the HBCU's and also ensure that they are fully able to take advantage of all of the Federal government's support to educational institutions.  Those agencies that regularly interact with HBCU's will need to provide a plan on how their customer service can be improved.  Further there is an interagency working group that is established to coordinate the work.

Section 3

This section establishes a Board of Advisors and defines the mission and functions of that board.  It directs the Department of Education to provide the necessary funding to the board and mandates that the board reports annually to the President.

Section 4

This section revokes EO 13532 which was the Obama era EO that had established a similar advisory committee.

Section 5

This section includes a definition for "historically black colleges and universities".  Subsection (b) directs chosen departments to provide "timely" reports on the work they have done to support the advisory committee.  Finally, it includes the usual legal fine print necessary to assure the constitutionality of the EO.

My Commentary

For the perspective of the time that has passed, this EO was clearly lip service.  The EO moved the structure around somewhat as opposed to doing anything new.  It seems like it had been done simply for a photo op.  Even at the time, there were many that expressed cynicism.

Executive Order 13812: Labor-management forums

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13812 is entitled "Revocation of Executive Order Creating Labor-Management Forums" and was published September 29th, 2017.  It has 3 sections.

Section 1

In this section, the justification that these Labor-Management forums have not been effective is provided for revoking the EO that established them.

Section 2

This section revokes EO 13522 and also directs the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to rescind any orders, rules, regulations, etc. that were implemented for compliance to the original EO.

Section 3

This section includes the necessary legal fine print to assure the constitutionality of this EO.

My Commentary

This was interesting in my review of the EO 13811 which was a continuation of the committees which were previously addressed in EO 13708.  I did not catch that there were advisory committees that did not get renewed.  In review of EO 13522, it does create large structures to be able to sit down and discuss issues.  While I can see how these forums do not fit with the general principles of the Republican party, I believe there is a grain of salt in the justification given.  I am certain that there are some people who care about this, but few of those will be outside Washington, DC.

Executive Order 13811: Advisory committees

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13811 is entitled "Continuance of Certain Federal Advisory Committees" and was published on September 29th, 2017.  It has 3 sections and while it is very much administrative, it provides an interesting list of advisory committees.

Section 1

This section lists all of the advisory committees that currently exist and extends them for 2 years.

(a) Committee for the Preservation of the White House; Executive Order 11145, as amended (Department of the Interior).  I tried to look this up and could not find that the committee had a web page or anything.  I am a bit surprised that the First Lady is made an honorary member in that it seems a bit sexist.

(b) President's Commission on White House Fellowships; Executive Order 11183, as amended (Office of Personnel Management).

(c) President's Committee on the National Medal of Science; Executive Order 11287, as amended (National Science Foundation).

(d) President's Export Council; Executive Order 12131, as amended (Department of Commerce).

(e) President's Committee on the International Labor Organization; Executive Order 12216, as amended (Department of Labor).  This committee has not met since 2010.  I don't really understand why someone didn't delete it off the list...

(f) President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee; Executive Order 12382, as amended (Department of Homeland Security).

(g) National Industrial Security Program Policy Advisory Committee; Executive Order 12829, as amended (National Archives and Records Administration).  This committee apparently deals with classified information.

(h) Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee; Executive Order 12905 (Office of the United States Trade Representative).

(i) Governmental Advisory Committee to the United States Representative to the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation; Executive Order 12915 (Environmental Protection Agency).

(j) National Advisory Committee to the United States Representative to the North American Commission for Environmental Cooperation; Executive Order 12915 (Environmental Protection Agency).  See (i) above.  This just seems weird that they created two committees.

(k) Good Neighbor Environmental Board; Executive Order 12916, as amended (Environmental Protection Agency).

(l) Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS; Executive Order 12963, as amended (Department of Health and Human Services).

(m) President's Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities; Executive Order 12994, as amended (Department of Health and Human Services).

(n) Invasive Species Advisory Committee; Executive Order 13112, as amended (Department of the Interior).  I think that some good UFO jokes could be made about this committee.

(o) Marine Protected Areas Federal Advisory Committee; Executive Order 13158 (Department of Commerce).

(p) Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health; Executive Order 13179 (Department of Health and Human Services).

(q) National Infrastructure Advisory Council; Executive Order 13231, as amended (Department of Homeland Security).       

(r) President's Council on Fitness, Sports, and Nutrition; Executive Order 13265, as amended (Department of Health and Human Services).

(s) President's Advisory Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders; Executive Order 13515, as amended (Department of Education).

(t) President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology; Executive Order 13539, as amended (Department of Energy).

(u) Interagency Task Force on Veterans Small Business Development; Executive Order 13540 (Small Business Administration).

(v) State, Local, Tribal, and Private Sector (SLTPS) Policy Advisory Committee; Executive Order 13549 (National Archives and Records Administration).

(w) President's Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for Hispanics; Executive Order 13555 (Department of Education).

(x) President's Advisory Commission on Educational Excellence for African Americans; Executive Order 13621 (Department of Education).

(y) President's Advisory Council on Doing Business in Africa; Executive Order 13675, as amended (Department of Commerce).

(z) Presidential Advisory Council on Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria; Executive Order 13676 (Department of Health and Human Services).

(aa) Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee; initially established pursuant to Presidential Memorandum on Improving Spectrum Management for the 21st Century (November 30, 2004) (Department of Commerce).

(bb) National Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Advisory Board; National Security Presidential Directive-39, “U.S. National Space-Based Position, Navigation, and Timing Policy” (December 8, 2004) (National Aeronautics and Space Administration).

(cc) San Juan Islands National Monument Advisory Committee; Proclamation 8947 of March 25, 2013 (Department of the Interior).

(dd) Bears Ears National Monument Advisory Committee; Proclamation 9558 of December 28, 2016 (Department of the Interior).

(ee) Gold Butte National Monument Advisory Committee; Proclamation 9559 of December 28, 2016 (Department of the Interior).

(ff) President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities; Executive Order 13779 (Department of Education).

Section 2

This section redelegates the duties of the President to the head of various agencies.

Section 3

This section does two things.  First it states that this EO takes the place of EO 13708 which is an administrative necessity.  The second is that it revokes EO 13805 which then effectively disbands the Presidential Advisory Council on Infrastructure.

Section 4

This section states that the EO is effective September 30th, 2017.

My commentary

Really? Wow.

Executive Order 13810:Additional Sanctions, North Korea

What the Executive Order says

Executive Order (EO) 13810 entitled "Imposing Additional Sanctions With Respect to North Korea" was issued on September 20th.  It has a preamble and 12 sections.  This EO was issued to strengthen sanctions against North Korea because of the launching of missiles.

Preamble

This section summarizes some of the reasons why North Korea continues to be a threat to the United States.

Section 1

This section declares that a lot of commercial activity with North Korea or its nationals is blocked.

Section 2

This section states that aircraft and vessels that have been in North Korea are blocked from coming to the USA for a period of 180 days after their departure from North Korea.

Section 3

This section declares that funds are frozen and that financial transfers with North Koreans are prohibited.

Section 4

This section directs the Secretary of the Treasury to impose sanctions on foreign financial institutions if they do business with North Korea.

Section 5

This section bars entry into the US of persons who are conducting business with North Korea as defined in section 1.

Section 6

This section prohibits trying to evade these requirements or forming a conspiracy to try to evade these requirements.

Section 7

This section exempts the Federal Government from the prohibitions in the Executive Order.

Section 8

This section provides definitions for "person", "entity", "United States person", "North Korean person", "foreign financial institution", and "knowingly."

Section 9

This section provides rationale for implementation of the prohibitions without any notice (such as is required in rulemaking normally).

Section 10

This section directs the Secretary of the Treasury to get on his horse and enforce all the provisions including creating rules and regulations.

Section 11

This section defines when the EO comes into effect.

Section 12

This section is legal fine print.

My Commentary

This is actually a good EO in my opinion.  While the rhetoric has been inflammatory and as a result of contradicting the Secretary of State, there is real confusion as to what the negotiating position of the USA is, at least this EO is clear as to the effects and takes a strong position to pressure North Korea and those who support it to stop launching missiles.  The EO includes references to and builds upon a number of previous EO's and various laws and regulations.  It has the hallmarks of being written by knowledgeable people within the administration who have done this kind of thing before.  The President only had to sign it.
Enforcement of such things, especially since a lot of the prohibited activities could perhaps be conducted in disguised ways and it will be difficult to prove motive in the way of many actions.  I also note that there has been a notice from the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control which listed a number of persons and entities from which property and interests are blocked.

Book Review: Knots by Gunnhild Oyehaug

First, I have to apologize since I can't figure out how to get the special character so as to spell the author's last name correctly.  The book is called Knots and originally I had thought of knots in rope, however, there are some different kinds of knots involved in a few of the stories including knots in rope as well as wood.
I was surprised at just how much passion is invoked in the stories.  At times rawly sexual, the characters are variously mad, glad and sad with thoughts, concerns and action revolving around family, lovers, would-be lovers, old lovers and those never loved.  There are 23 short stories in this thin tome.  A few stories are related.  The draw is the simple authentic language, the vivid emotion with all of the turbulent internal dialogue such that the setting, the plot, everything but the characters fades in relation to the burning emotions and intense focus that the characters express as we learn a little about the dark cold winters in Bergen, Norway.
I've enjoyed the read and recommend it to anyone who is looking for something a bit different.  It certainly will not please those who are looking for a trashy romance novel or pulp sci-fi story.  There are some flaws such that one does have to allow for sparsely decorated sets and characters who are only defined by their love (or not) of their spouse.
Would that Ms. Oyehaug have one of her novels translated into English, that might be a tasty read, or, should some of these ambiguities that can be left alone in a short story not be addressed in the novel, dry and chewy, potentially repetitive in flavor across the entirety of the story.  But I would look forward to taking a bite to see how the dish has turned out.
Knots by Gunnhild Oyehaug is available from the Library.

Executive Order 13809: Arming Police to the Teeth

What the Executive Order Says

Executive Order (EO) 13809 is entitled "Restoring State, Tribal, and Local Law Enforcement's Access to Life-Saving Equipment and Resources" and has 3 sections.  It was issued on August 28th, 2017 and revokes the rules established in EO 13688.

Section 1

This section revokes EO 13688 entitled "Federal Support for Local Law Enforcement Equipment Acquisition" dated January 16, 2015.

Section 2

This section directs the Executive branch to unimplement the recommendations pursuant to EO 13688.  Including issuing new rulemaking to change any regulations that were issued as a result of that EO.

Section 3

This section includes the standard fine print to assure the constitutionality of the EO.

My Commentary

The original EO 13688 restricted the transfer of high powered military weapons and equipment to police forces.  For example, what police force really needs a 200 rounds per minute 50 caliber machine gun?  Under the revocation, police forces can now get these kinds of weapons when they are transferred to military surplus.  There have been documentaries created which discussed the militarization of police forces which contributed to an us vs. them attitude on the part of the members of the force as well as a reliance on resolving situations through force.
In my opinion, the safeguards in EO 13688 seemed to me to have been reasonable and I don't think this EO will contribute to the betterment of society.