Dawg Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 IMO........ President Obama will issue an executive order on Thursday reversing the Bush administration policy that bans the use of federal dollars by non-govermental organizations that discuss or provide abortions outside of the United States. Obama will sign the executive order on the 36th anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion in all 50 states. The policy, known in governmental circles as the "Mexico City policy," requires any non-governmental organization to agree before receiving U.S. funds that they will "neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations." The language was announced at the United Nations International Conference on Population in 1984, and was approved by President Reagan and originally drafted by his assistant secretary of state, Alan Keyes. Keyes ran unsuccessfully as the GOP nominee against Obama for the U.S. Senate in 2004. President George Herbert Walker Bush continued Reagan's Mexico City policy. President Bill Clinton issued an executive order lifting the ban on Jan. 22, 1993. President George W. Bush issued an executive order re-instating the ban on federal dollars for NGOs that discuss or provide abortions on Jan. 22, 2001. But yet, he's gonna freeze salaries on folks in Washington? President Barack Obama's first public act in office Wednesday was to institute new limits on lobbyists in his White House and to freeze the salaries of high-paid aides, in a nod to the country's economic turmoil. Announcing the moves while attending a ceremony in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building to swear in his staff, Obama said the steps "represent a clean break from business as usual." The pay freeze, first reported by The Associated Press, would hold salaries at their current levels for the roughly 100 White House employees who make over $100,000 a year. "Families are tightening their belts, and so should Washington," said the new president, taking office amid startlingly bad economic times that many fear will grow worse. Those affected by the freeze include the high-profile jobs of White House chief of staff, national security adviser and press secretary. Other aides who work in relative anonymity also would fit into that cap if Obama follows a structure similar to the one George W. Bush set up. Obama's new lobbying rules will not only ban aides from trying to influence the administration when they leave his staff. Those already hired will be banned from working on matters they have previously lobbied on, or to approach agencies that they once targeted. The rules also ban lobbyists from giving gifts of any size to any member of his administration. It wasn't immediately clear whether the ban would include the traditional "previous relationships" clause, allowing gifts from friends or associates with which an employee comes in with strong ties. The new rules also require that anyone who leaves his administration is not allowed to try to influence former friends and colleagues for at least two years. Obama is requiring all staff to attend to an ethics briefing like one he said he attended last week. Obama called the rules tighter "than under any other administration in history." They followed pledges during his campaign to be strict about the influence of lobbyist in his White House. "The new rules on lobbying alone, no matter how tough, are not enough to fix a broken system in Washington," he said. "That's why I'm also setting rules that govern not just lobbyists but all those who have been selected to serve in my administration." In an attempt to deliver on pledges of a transparent government, Obama said he would change the way the federal government interprets the Freedom of Information Act. He said he was directing agencies that vet requests for information to err on the side of making information public -- not to look for reasons to legally withhold it -- an alteration to the traditional standard of evaluation. Just because a government agency has the legal power to keep information private does not mean that it should, Obama said. Reporters and public-interest groups often make use of the law to explore how and why government decisions were made; they are often stymied as agencies claim legal exemptions to the law. "For a long time now, there's been too much secrecy in this city," Obama said. He said the orders he was issuing Wednesday will not "make government as honest and transparent as it needs to be" nor go as far as he would like. "But these historic measures do mark the beginning of a new era of openness in our country," Obama said. "And I will, I hope, do something to make government trustworthy in the eyes of the American people, in the days and weeks, months and years to come." What this looks like in my eyes is........he's taking money away from Americans and allowing non-govermental organizations outside the U.S. to perform or discuss baby killing. I guess just because it's not part of "planned parenthood." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kat Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 I actually like the lobbying idea..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 My greatest problem is that he freezes salaries; yet spend $150 million on a party! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kat Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 My greatest problem is that he freezes salaries; yet spend $150 million on a party! good point there preacherman, but still these folks were way overpaid. I do agree with ya on the party thing though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I agree on the overpaid part as well. But it is a double standard him freezing money; when he just spent a boatload on himself. He said that we were going to have to tighten the belt straps! Well, practice what you preach, Mr. President! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireStrut Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I agree on the overpaid part as well. But it is a double standard him freezing money; when he just spent a boatload on himself. He said that we were going to have to tighten the belt straps! Well, practice what you preach, Mr. President! I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muggs Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 My greatest problem is that he freezes salaries; yet spend $150 million on a party! I don't think he was in charge of planning that. Pretty ridiculous, but it's not like Obama had control over that, Washington wanted to mark the historical event and do it right...pretty hypocrtical though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I don't think he was in charge of planning that. Pretty ridiculous, but it's not like Obama had control over that, Washington wanted to mark the historical event and do it right...pretty hypocrtical though. Eric is probably right here, and that number may be just a bit over exagerated from what I heard. On the abortion issue, I agree it is a bad move in my opinion, but then his stance on that issue was never really any secret despite him talking around theh subject, think we all should have expected it. Maybe Obama will hold true to his words on those lobbyists and the white house positions, time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
preacherman Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Please don't take me as some one who wants to argue; that is not the way I want to come across. But while he may not have been in charge of planning it, he is the President and had the power to say "No Thanks", let's put that money to use somewhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 Please don't take me as some one who wants to argue; that is not the way I want to come across. But while he may not have been in charge of planning it, he is the President and had the power to say "No Thanks", let's put that money to use somewhere else. I understand where you are coming from too Scott and I agree with what you are saying about it being hypocritical. Can actually kind of see both sides of this. I do think that the party was way too much and I do also recall people blasting Bush over what was spent on his inaugural, his did not cost half what Obama's did. Really a shame in my eyes that so much money is wasted on these political parties when there are people starving here in our own country, money could be much better spent, but both sides have been guilty, Obama's party planners have just been guilty on a much larger scale than ever before seen in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 I don't think he was in charge of planning that. Pretty ridiculous, but it's not like Obama had control over that, Washington wanted to mark the historical event and do it right...pretty hypocrtical though. neither was bush at his party. but look at the years of criticism he got from everyone for spending that much. bush: 50 million. WAAAAAAy too much obama 150 million. just right. change. hope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.