2 ms·

Somehow "number of EOs" doesn't sound like the right metric to use when determining whether executive power is growing. Surely it's the content that matters.

bombcar 2y ago
Especially when there are EOs for naming post offices and other boring mechanical work of the executive. It would take some serious effort (and there’d be disagreement) but maybe you could classify “important” government changes and if they were enacted by congress, EO, courts, etc.
- WillowWithAWand 2y ago
  Also, that link stops with Obama and that leaves out two whole administrations that would be pretty pertinent data in this discussion. Nearly a decade of data. It looks like Trump's first term had 220 and Biden had 162. It would be interesting to see the data classified the way you described and then broken down by party over time. The actual policymaking via EO by each party over the last 50 years would be more elucidating than the straight numbers for sure.
ANewFormation 2y ago
FDR forced people to give up all their gold assets at a fixed rate, under threat of imprisonment for a decade. He then proceeded to nearly double the declared exhange rate up once the government had confiscated everybody's gold. All done by executive order. Makes basically all modern EOs look pretty innocuous by comparison. That said I actually agree and would love to see a sharp reduction in executive power, especially as it comes to using the military. If we're going to go bombing places, that should require a declaration of war from Congress. And 'emergency' powers should not be enabled for decades on end. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102
- bigstrat2003 2y ago
  FDR truly was the worst president we ever had. The more I learn about him, the more I wish we could roll back history to before his presidency.
bumby 2y ago
I’m open to that, but what context do you think is appropriate and how would you measure it for an unbiased metric?

bombcar 2y ago

Especially when there are EOs for naming post offices and other boring mechanical work of the executive. It would take some serious effort (and there’d be disagreement) but maybe you could classify “important” government changes and if they were enacted by congress, EO, courts, etc.

WillowWithAWand 2y ago
Also, that link stops with Obama and that leaves out two whole administrations that would be pretty pertinent data in this discussion. Nearly a decade of data. It looks like Trump's first term had 220 and Biden had 162. It would be interesting to see the data classified the way you described and then broken down by party over time. The actual policymaking via EO by each party over the last 50 years would be more elucidating than the straight numbers for sure.

ANewFormation 2y ago

FDR forced people to give up all their gold assets at a fixed rate, under threat of imprisonment for a decade. He then proceeded to nearly double the declared exhange rate up once the government had confiscated everybody's gold. All done by executive order. Makes basically all modern EOs look pretty innocuous by comparison. That said I actually agree and would love to see a sharp reduction in executive power, especially as it comes to using the military. If we're going to go bombing places, that should require a declaration of war from Congress. And 'emergency' powers should not be enabled for decades on end. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

bigstrat2003 2y ago
FDR truly was the worst president we ever had. The more I learn about him, the more I wish we could roll back history to before his presidency.

bumby 2y ago

I’m open to that, but what context do you think is appropriate and how would you measure it for an unbiased metric?