What if....? A strategy to counter the Bush scorched-earth initiative.

[TygrBright]

I don't know if this would work, Constitutionally. Perhaps some of the more savvy legal minds around here can comment on that. But here's my idea:

Bush is making hundreds of last-minute rule changes, changes that have the potential to damage and delay many of Obama's planned initiatives to rescue our nation. Most of them appear to be based on recommendations proffered months or years ago and quietly pushed through the various pre-implementation bureaucratic hurdles by Bush apparatchiks behind the scenes.

Those pre-implementation hurdles include comment periods, agency reviews, etc., which appear to have been finessed, "complied with" pro-forma but in actuality ignored, and otherwise manipulated. The intent-- ensuring that rule changes are feasible, desirable, practical, and in accordance with the public good and the will of the voters-- of the hurdles is benign, although it appears to have been comparatively ineffective against the determined assaults of the Bush cabal.

However, those hurdles ALSO present the Obama administration with its biggest challenge in reversing the toxic, scorched-earth rule changes and policy determinations being implemented now and for the next 36 days. Because repeal of the changes, or the substitution of new rules and determinations, would also have to go through the regimen of pre-implementation hurdles. And the Obama Administration could considerably weaken their position for future initiatives if they are seen to treat the process cavalierly.

So here's my strategy suggestion: Ask Congress to implement a 180-day moratorium on carrying out (by Federal agencies and agents) all rule changes implemented between November 5th, 2008, and January 19th, 2009. That is, the rules will be technically in effect as implemented, but the agencies governed thereby will not have to act on them for six months. That will give the Obama administration the time needed to detox some changes, push through repeal for others, and replace the rest with proper rules/determinations.

Granted, this rests on the notion of getting Congress to do something rational and public-spirited, but it might be possible in the first 30 days or so of the new session.

speculatively,
Bright

[babylonsister]

1. Here's something I just read that might hold the solution...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4647382&mesg_id=4647382

[TygrBright]

2. Very interesting. Whatever works, as far as I am concerned.

And I'm sure that someone's keeping a list.

A LONG list.

Shame they'll have to waste valuable time on it no matter which strategy they engage.

hopefully,
Bright

[mmm413]

3. Brilliant idea!

And while we're at it, let's figure out a way to shrink the time from the election and the inauguration. I'm not sure if that's in the Constitution or is statutory. But that lag time is (or can be) very destructive.

[Time for change]

4. That sounds like an excellent idea to me --

Though I don't have the legal expertise to say for sure.

But I thought I heard of some rule or law that would make it reltively easy for the Obama administration or Congress to reverse rules inituated in the last 60 days or so.

[offog]

5. Worth checking into.

The Bush administration's scorched earth tactics really burn me up. What's up with that? It seems to be a childish attitude of "If we can't have the White House, we'll burn it down." Republicans are such mean-spirited, nasty, vindictive bastards.