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.