On The First Day of Business Biden Did So Give to Me: Part 1

Analysis of Eighteen, Sometimes Comical, Executive Orders

I aim to always be honest and fair in the assessments I provide. This will be no different. We are already three days into the Biden Presidency as he embarks on what will be a radically different America that I and others do not believe in. Nevertheless, I will not be a bulwark against all things Biden or Progressive Socialism. Dire as it may be the only way through the darkness is to shine truth and reality; peace and love. Therefore, let us proceed.

Simple enough, I will provide a yay or nay followed by a few thoughts, bits of information, and possibly quotes from the Executive Orders themselves.

Share E.K.R. Report

THE LIST

1) Paris Climate Agreement

2) Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government

3) Proclamation on Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to The United States

4) Executive Order on Protecting the Federal Workforce and Requiring Mask-Wearing

5) Executive Order on Organizing and Mobilizing the United States Government to Provide a Unified and Effective Response to Combat COVID-19 and to Provide United States Leadership on Global Health and Security

6) Executive Order on the Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities

7) Executive Order on Revocation of Certain Executive Orders Concerning Federal Regulation

8) Executive Order on Ensuring a Lawful and Accurate Enumeration and Apportionment Pursuant to the Decennial Census

9) Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis

10) Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation

11) Executive Order on Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Personnel

12) Proclamation on the Termination Of Emergency With Respect To The Southern Border Of The United States And Redirection Of Funds Diverted To Border Wall Construction 

13) Reinstating Deferred Enforced Departure for Liberians

14) Preserving and Fortifying Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)

15) Executive Order on Ensuring an Equitable Pandemic Response and Recovery

16) Executive Order on Supporting the Reopening and Continuing Operation of Schools and Early Childhood Education Providers

17) National Security Directive on United States Global Leadership to Strengthen the International COVID-19 Response and to Advance Global Health Security and Biological Preparedness

18) Executive Order on Establishing the COVID-19 Pandemic Testing Board and Ensuring a Sustainable Public Health Workforce for COVID-19 and Other Biological Threats

1) Paris Climate Agreement

My Vote: NAY

Like too many of the present global agreements and protocols, the PC agreement limits the growth of nation’s while simultaneously holding nation-states liable to an international board of bureaucrats. Sovereignty is the lifeblood of a nation-state. We must support it. And as Richard Allen Epstein demonstrated, no country that signs this agreement is free from its reaches:

The English Court of Appeal handed down a blockbuster decision last week which held that the British Government had to take into account the impact on global warming from adding a long-planned and long-delayed third runway to Heathrow Airport. The reason: Britain’s decision to sign the Paris Agreement of December 2015.  The Heathrow runway project is estimated to cost some £14 billion and take until 2028 to complete. When completed, the third runway would accommodate 700 additional flights per day, which would significantly increase carbon emissions.

Read rest here: The Revenge Of The Paris Agreement

Donald Trump was correct in leaving the accord. It allowed the United States to combat climate change without the hindrances of even more regulations. While I do believe in man-made climate change and we should take action for reasons of great stability and sustainability, it would also be wrong to ignore the limitations of our science and technology. Again, Epstein back in 2017:

At this point, solar and wind energy, as the indefatigable Matt Ridley points out, amount to at most a trivial portion of the global energy supply, less than one percent in total. Indeed, most of that production comes from state-subsidized ventures that could never survive on their own. And while firms race to collect government subsidies to develop so-called cleaner energy, none of their research is likely to solve the intractable problem of how to store wind or solar energy efficiently

Read all here: Forget The Paris Accords

Oh, and some of the art is just meant to be comical and others more serious. Up to you to decide which is which.

2) Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government

My Vote: Nay

From the EO:

Our country faces converging economic, health, and climate crises that have exposed and exacerbated inequities, while a historic movement for justice has highlighted the unbearable human costs of systemic racism.  Our Nation deserves an ambitious whole-of-government equity agenda that matches the scale of the opportunities and challenges that we face.

It is therefore the policy of my Administration that the Federal Government should pursue a comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.  Affirmatively advancing equity, civil rights, racial justice, and equal opportunity is the responsibility of the whole of our Government.  Because advancing equity requires a systematic approach to embedding fairness in decision-making processes, executive departments and agencies (agencies) must recognize and work to redress inequities in their policies and programs that serve as barriers to equal opportunity.  

Furthermore:

Sec. 2.  Definitions.  For purposes of this order:  (a)  The term “equity” means the consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality. 

(b)  The term “underserved communities” refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life, as exemplified by the list in the preceding definition of “equity.”   

The problem with the Executive Order is not the attempt to address the grievances of Black America or any other minority groups for that matter. There are legitimate concerns and though I am personally opposed to movements like BLM and ANTIFA for philosophical and theological reasons, I am not opposed to the notion nor do I have enough knowledge to deny the existence of systematic concerns such as racism. But the Biden Administration and Company are associating themselves with ideological radicals. Equity is merely code for a drastic shift in how society functions, a truly dangerous one.

James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, and Peter Boghossian over at New Discourses have done a phenomenal job at combating the leftist radicalism from CRT and Postmodernism. On the subject of Equity:

Notice that, in Critical Social Justice, the meaning of “equity” takes pains to distinguish itself from that of “equality.” Where equality means that citizen A and citizen B are treated equally, equity means “adjusting shares in order to make citizens A and B equal.” In that sense, equity is something like a kind of “social communism,” if we will—the intentional redistribution of shares, but not necessarily along lines of existing economic disparity but in order to adjust for and correct current and historical injustices, both as exist in reality and as have been drawn out by the various critical theories (specifically, Theory—see also, critical race Theoryqueer Theorygender studiesfat studiesdisability studies, and postcolonial Theory).

The example given (above) of providing a wheelchair user with privileged access to an elevator is one that few people would find unfair. However, within Critical Social Justice conceptions of the world, specifically disability studies here, invisible systems of power and privilege are understood to hold some people back in often invisible ways because of their racegendersexuality, or other marginalized identity factors. Therefore, “equity” requires giving some identity groups privileges in order to redress the perceived imbalance.

In common parlance, this is the difference between attempting to force equality of outcome by enforcing some resource allocation system and equality of opportunity, which Critical Social Justice regards not only as myth but as a harmful ideology that upholds injustices like “white supremacy.”

Because of the blank slatism and simplistic ideas of power and identity found within Critical Social Justice worldviews, all imbalances of representation in desirable areas of work are held to be caused by these perceived power dynamics. Equity is the intended remedy to this problem, and it is made applicable only (and especially) to positions of status and influence. For example, there is no equity program that attempts to increase the number of female sanitation workers, though there are equity programs that seek to increase the number of female doctors and politicians, and these endure even in high-status positions that employ more women than men. Of particular concern are positions that have influence where power is concerned, including in terms of shaping the discourses of society.

You can read the rest here: Equity

There is always more to be said but I will leave this one for now.

3) Proclamation on Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to The United States

My Vote: YAY

I promised I was not full of nay’s. Though the language is absurd “Discriminatory Bans” I am not going to make too much of a fuss. We should reopen visas and applications. Simple as that.

Share E.K.R. Report

4) Executive Order on Protecting the Federal Workforce and Requiring Mask-Wearing

My Vote: NAY

It is redundant. More rhetoric. No federal building is lacking in requirements or protections. The government is making all the necessary and required and requested accommodations. Mr. President, we get it! You are the “healer” of whatever.

5) Executive Order on Organizing and Mobilizing the United States Government to Provide a Unified and Effective Response to Combat COVID-19 and to Provide United States Leadership on Global Health and Security

My Vote: YAY

Okay, so I am hesitant and in noway going to layout the real meat he has planned in his 200 paged National Strategy. Like with all things involving the government on matters this big there will be some good and some downright bad from this plan. My biggest fear is the long-term invasiveness of this Government-Corporate apparatus to our lives both public and private.

Wow, I have reached my limit. So this will have to be a continuing series over the weekend. Until then please subscribe, share, like, and checkout my continued series at Truth In Focus, Mob Rule Mob Rules Part 3: Trumphantism: Donald J. Trump & The Post-Trump World.