The Role of Executive Orders: Transparency and Accountability in My Presidential Platform
The use of Executive Orders (EOs) is a complex and often contentious issue in American politics. While EOs can be powerful tools, they must be used with caution to maintain the balance of power between the Executive Branch and Congress, which is crucial for preserving our democratic republic. Historically, EOs have been used to bypass Congressional inaction, leading to concerns about the erosion of checks and balances that are fundamental to our system of government.
Over the years, the use of EOs has escalated. Bill Clinton issued 364 EOs, George W. Bush 291, Barack Obama 276, Donald Trump 220 – in just one four-year term! –, and Joe Biden, as of mid-2024, has already issued over 115. This increasing reliance on EOs suggests a troubling shift away from the legislative process that is meant to be at the heart of our democracy. The Constitution grants significant power to the Executive Branch, but this power is intended to be balanced by a strong, functional Congress. When Congress is gridlocked or unwilling to act, presidents have increasingly turned to EOs to push through their agendas, often bypassing the legislative process entirely.
During the 2019-2020 Democratic primary debates, Kamala Harris made several statements about using executive orders if Congress did not act on her legislative proposals, particularly regarding gun control. In an April 2019 CNN town hall, Harris stated, "Upon being elected, I will give the United States Congress 100 days to get their act together and have the courage to pass reasonable gun safety laws. And if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action." She specifically mentioned that her executive actions would include measures like universal background checks and revoking the licenses of non-compliant gun dealers (FactCheck.org, PolitiFact).
These experiences have shaped my belief that while EOs can be necessary, they must be proposed transparently before an election, allowing voters to decide if they support such actions. By presenting these EOs as part of my platform, voters can make an informed decision at the ballot. If elected, the implementation of these EOs would reflect the mandate given by the voters, not a president's personal agenda or partisan goals. This ensures that the use of EOs is not a form of executive overreach but a reflection of the democratic will of the people.
My preference is for Congress to take the lead in passing legislation, especially on critical issues that affect the entire nation. However, given the historical inaction and political gridlock in Congress, I have decided to outline a series of proposed EOs as a last resort. These EOs are not my first choice—they are a contingency plan if Congress fails to act on issues that have overwhelming public support. The goal is not to govern by decree but to ensure that the will of the people is respected and that our government functions effectively.
Ultimately, these proposed EOs are about restoring balance and ensuring that the Executive Branch remains accountable to the people. They are designed to address specific, urgent needs that Congress has repeatedly failed to address. By making these EOs part of my campaign platform, I am committing to transparency and giving the American people a clear voice in the direction of our nation. If elected, I will use EOs sparingly and responsibly, always with the intention of preserving the integrity of our three branches of government, with the ultimate power remaining, always, in Congress.