Obama Poised To Reverse Bush Policy

Washington Post: Stem Cell Research, Auto Emission Rules, Reproductive Rights Among Targets of President-Elect's Team

(Washington Post)  Transition advisers to President-elect Barack Obama have compiled a list of about 200 Bush administration actions and executive orders that could be swiftly undone to reverse White House policies on climate change, stem cell research, reproductive rights and other issues, according to congressional Democrats, campaign aides and experts working with the transition team.

A team of four dozen advisers, working for months in virtual solitude, set out to identify regulatory and policy changes Obama could implement soon after his inauguration. The team is now consulting with liberal advocacy groups, Capitol Hill staffers and potential agency chiefs to prioritize those they regard as the most onerous or ideologically offensive, said a top transition official who was not permitted to speak on the record about the inner workings of the transition.

In some instances, Obama would be quickly delivering on promises he made during his two-year campaign, while in others he would be embracing Clinton-era policies upended by President Bush during his eight years in office.

"The kind of regulations they are looking at" are those imposed by Bush for "overtly political" reasons, in pursuit of what Democrats say was a partisan Republican agenda, said Dan Mendelson, a former associate administrator for health in the Clinton administration's Office of Management and Budget.

The list of executive orders targeted by Obama's team could well get longer in the coming days, as Bush's appointees rush to enact a number of last-minute policies in an effort to extend his legacy.

A spokeswoman said yesterday that no plans for regulatory changes had been finalized. "Before he makes any decisions on potential executive or legislative actions, he will be conferring with congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle, as well as interested groups," Obama transition spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said. "Any decisions would need to be discussed with his Cabinet nominees, none of whom have been selected yet."

Still, the preelection transition team, comprising mainly lawyers, has positioned the incoming president to move fast on high-priority items without waiting for Congress.

Obama himself has signaled, for example, that he intends to reverse Bush's controversial limit on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, a decision that scientists say has restrained research into some of the most promising avenues for defeating a wide array of diseases, such as Parkinson's.

Bush's August 2001 decision pleased religious conservatives who have moral objections to the use of cells from days-old human embryos, which are destroyed in the process.

But Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) said that during Obama's final swing through her state in October, she reminded him that because the restrictions were never included in legislation, Obama "can simply reverse them by executive order." Obama, she said, "was very receptive to that." Opponents of the restrictions have already drafted an executive order he could sign.

The new president is also expected to lift a so-called global gag rule barring international family planning groups that receive U.S. aid from counseling women about the availability of abortion, even in countries where the procedure is legal, said Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, he rescinded the Reagan-era regulation, known as the Mexico City policy, but Bush re-imposed it.

"We have been communicating with his transition staff" almost daily, Richards said. "We expect to see a real change."

While Obama said at a news conference last week that his top priority would be to stimulate the economy and create jobs, his advisers say that focus will not delay key shifts in social and regulatory policies, including some - such as the embrace of new environmental safeguards - that Obama has said will have long-term, beneficial impacts on the economy.

The president-elect has said, for example, that he intends to quickly reverse the Bush administration's decision last December to deny California the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles. "Effectively tackling global warming demands bold and innovative solutions, and given the failure of this administration to act, California should be allowed to pioneer," Obama said in January.

California had sought permission from the Environmental Protection Agency to require that greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles be cut by 30 percent between 2009 and 2016, effectively mandating that cars achieve a fuel economy standard of at least 36 miles per gallon within eight years. Seventeen other states had promised to adopt California's rules, representing in total 45 percent of the nation's automobile market. Environmentalists cheered the California initiative because it would stoke innovation that would potentially benefit the entire country.

"An early move by the Obama administration to sign the California waiver would signal the seriousness of intent to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil and build a future for the domestic auto market," said Kevin Knobloch, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Before the election, Obama told others that he favors declaring that carbon dioxide emissions are endangering human welfare, following an EPA task force recommendation last December that Bush and his aides shunned in order to protect the utility and auto industries.

Robert Sussman, who was the EPA's deputy administrator during the Clinton administration and is now overseeing EPA transition planning for Obama, wrote a paper last spring strongly recommending such a finding. Others in the campaign have depicted it as an issue on which Obama is keen to show that politics must not interfere with scientific advice.

Some related reforms embraced by Obama's transition advisers would alter procedures for decision-making on climate issues. A book titled "Change for America," being published next week by the Center for American Progress, an influential liberal think tank, will recommend, for example, that Obama rapidly create a National Energy Council to coordinate all policymaking related to global climate change.

The center's influence with Obama is substantial: It was created by former Clinton White House official John D. Podesta, a co-chairman of the transition effort, and much of its staff has been swept into planning for Obama's first 100 days in office.

The National Energy Council would be a counterpart to the White House National Economic Council that Clinton created in a 1993 executive order.

"It would make sure all the oars are rowing in the right direction" and ensure that climate change policy "gets lots of attention inside the White House," said Daniel J. Weiss, a former Sierra Club official and senior fellow with the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

The center's new book will also urge Obama to sign an executive order requiring that greenhouse gas emissions be considered whenever the federal government examines the environmental impact of its actions under the existing National Environmental Policy Act. Several key members of Obama's transition team have already embraced the idea.

Other early Obama initiatives may address the need for improved food and drug regulation and chart a new course for immigration enforcement, some Obama advisers say. But they add that only a portion of his early efforts will be aimed at undoing Bush initiatives.

Despite enormous pent-up Democratic frustration, Obama and his team realize they must strike a balance between undoing Bush actions and setting their own course, said Winnie Stachelberg, the center's senior vice president for external affairs.

"It took eight years to get into this mess, and it will take a long time to get out of it," she said. "The next administration needs to look ahead. This transition team and the incoming administration gets that in a big way."

Now this is some change we desperately need. You go get ''em Barrack.

[southpaw65]

Good to have a President with a brain again.... almost forgot what that was like.

[wl7bzh]

No matter how great the talent, don''t under estimate the number of potential no win situations awaiting the new prez.

With the thought that no matter how good you appear to be, you ain''t gonna please every body-Very quickly we may hear the words "The honeymoon is over"

[ne_patriot7]

At long last... a president with a brain...
now.. how refreshing is that???

Go Barack

[omnibus66]

It will be virtually impossible to undo all of the damage done by the Smirkinator during his reign of terror, but a sincere attempt must be made.

But Obama should not get bogged down in this task. The much more important agenda is to get out of Iraq, put Americans back to work, and find an alternative for foreign oil. Lots of positive things to be done.

[zhynaryll]

Looks to me like Clinton all over again - with a tan. Same faces, same policies, same idiocy!! I thought The One was going to chart a new course! Fooled us all!!

[carl_toad]

The more I think about the voting age the more I support changing it. Young people just do not have the life experience or knowledge to make the kind of decision voting requires. Young naive inexperienced voters put Obama over the top in this election. Another reason to increase the voting age is associated with return on investment. I don''t think being of age is a good enough reason to be allowed to vote. What does a young person have invested in this country? Very little. They live with their parents and have contributed almost nothing to the system. They have invested nothing so have nothing to lose by a rash decision. On the other hand people who have been in the work force for a while or own a home will have a tendency to vote from a stable perspective not related to matters of the heart. I wouldn''t be opposed to requiring prospective voters to pass a test to prove they have a basic understanding of the issues effecting our country but that would eliminate a lot of people who may have been educationally disadvantaged. I definitely think the voting age for men should be around 28 and possibly 24 for women. Women tend to come to their senses quicker than us rowdy boyz.

[hroams]

Maybe we won''t be hearing from this new president that every thing he doesn''t understand(and under Bush he didn''t understand 90% of scientific matters) that something is "bad science".

[hitoyou1]

All I hear are fools.

[mavnomore]

cont

The United States is far and away the global leader in military spending. The United States spends more than the next 45 highest spending countries in the world combined.

* The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation |

And I will ask again, what do we have to show for it? Veterans without adequate health care, troops without proper equipment and bogged down in two wars. And with the infrastructure here in this country crumpling, more slashing of social programs, not just welfare but Medicaid, Medicare, veterans benefits. Her%u2019s the unbelievable part, we are borrowing money from China to fund these military programs that we don''t need or do not work. We will never have energy independence while we incest on spending over 46% of our budget on weapons systems. What good is a missile shield if there is nothing left to protect?

[mavnomore]

It is being reported that Obama is less than committed to the missile defense shield. This is exactly one of the rookie mistakes that worries me. Had Clinton not killed the very same program it would be up and running now. The Demoncrats just can''''t get the concept of high-tech defense through their thick heads. The sooner we can show the world that we are impervious to any kind of missile attack the sooner the world can start dismantling these obsolete weapons most of which carry nuclear capabilities. The signs were there before the election that Obama would weaken U.S. defense capabilities and now he is following through. I predict we will be attacked again on U.S. soil by terrorists during Obama''''s term. Sad but true.

Posted by Carl_Toad


Read the history of your great leader Reagan, he slashed social programs to dump tax dollars into Star Wars, tripling the deficit along the way. What do we have to show for it?

Fast forward to the latest great leader:

*On February 4, the Bush administration released its budget request for Fiscal Year 2009, which begins on October 1, 2008. For FY 2009, the White House is seeking $711 billion for the military -- $541 billion for the Pentagon and the nuclear weapons-related activities of the Department of Energy, and, according to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, at least $170 billion for ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

cont

[bigsk8fan]

that is exactly why americans voted obama in. to reverse the failed bush policies, from stem cell research, destruction of the economy, and failed illegal wars.

[carl_toad]

rafterman1 - If you owned a multimillion dollar corporation would you hire a 21-year-old kid to run it? Now ask yourself in grand scheme of things what is more important: 1) your tiny little company compared tot he rest of the country or 2) THE COUNTRY. It is a hands down no-brainer: young people should not vote. I would however grant an exception to the military.

[largohenry]

It is gratifying to see the return of sanity.

[misha128-2009]

There Obama goes driving in the "far-left" lane of politics. Barack Obama is a RADICAL "far-left" Liberal "nut-case" of a Democrat. He is NO Moderate Democrat, governing from the "middle". Just RADICAL "far-left" of the American People, he won''''t last more than a year til they will want him OUT of office!!!

Posted by scb1111_1 at 09:32 AM

There you are behind on the current Republican talking points again. According to Fox News and Karl Rove; Obama won because he ran a center to center-right campaign. Even Republican''s are abandoning the McCain/Palin socialist, leftist claims.

[carl_toad]

I agree that in two years after many failings by Obama Inc. voters will turn out and vote Republican in an attempt to reverse the continued downward slide. Young people won''t turn out for this vote because it doesn''t have the advertising and glitz so what we will have is the responsible and knowledgeable voting base make the decision and get us back on track.

[cariboubarbi]

Carl_Toad


Downward slide? What do you call the last 8 years. Do you ever wonder why Republicans have been getting voted out of office for the last 2 elections?

Perhaps your partisan hate has blinded you to the fact that the country is in a downward spiral.

If you can''t help this country back on it''s feet by joining your fellow Americans, just get out of the way.

[cariboubarbi]

Neocons,

Why don''t you join the country in helping us get out of this hole were in instead of spreading division and hate.

We can''t afford to play partisan games anymore.

If you can''t help then just get out of the way.

[misha128-2009]

... We went to Iraq and freed the Iraqi people. ...
Posted by mr22587 at 09:42 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Perhaps they should be permitted an opinion on the success of the mission considering the results of the ethnic cleansing of communities as our senior civilian leaders failed to assure the necessary resources to maintain order after the initial military operations were attained.

[cariboubarbi]

So without their money buing our debt, how is he going to grow the economy, you can''''''''t print money without it being backed by someone???

Posted by scb1111_1 at 09:42 AM : Nov 09, 2008



I don''t remember hearing you screech about record deficits being run up under the Bush administration or the 10 billion we''re wasting every month in Iraq. By the way the so-called "bailout" is a Bush plan.

Selective outrage?

[redhawk1021]

After two years of a "failed" administration by Barack Obama, 20% of those young voters who won''''t have any hopes for a any jobs will join the ranks of the Republican and help in that Congressional sweep for the Republicans in the House and Senate just like 1994!!!

Posted by scb1111_1 at 09:47 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Too bad in that time about another 1-2% of older white America will die off, so whatever gains you might make will be countered equally with the loss of your own voting block.

But hey, envision whatever fantasy you want to help get you through the day. I know you rightwing freakshows are suffering a living nightmare right now. Good.

[djerdman5]

I must say I am surprised at some of the comments that I believe show little if any balance. I for one do not think undoing the stem cell research ban is a left or liberal move. The vast majority of scientists and researchers, who are not godless people and who are life affirming individuals themselves, support this move because of the vast potential to help humanity find ways to save lives, and increase the quality of life. I am unable to understand how that can be perceived as highly liberal or left move. Life and helping the quality of life is not a left or right issue, it is a human issue.

This is time when we as a nation will be best served if all on the left, middle, and right, put our energy into working together in a civil manner to collectively find solutions, and let unbalanced attacks such as I see here be a thing of the past.

"United we stand, divided we fall." If and when we work together all things are possible.

[martin9p2]

mr22587, ..... a good thing Obama did was to get elected. He isn''t even President yet. You''re going to have to think of more thought-provoking questions.

[misha128-2009]

... Under the Great leadership of President Bush we went after and beat al Qaeda down. ...
Posted by mr22587 at 09:42 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Then why according to our own intelligence estimates does Al Qaeda have bases in 60 - 100 countries (up from 5 before the Bush attack) and currently have a operational strength greater than or equal to 9/11. With control of the organization still in the hands of many of those that attacked us operating in the Pakistan border area. Sounds like the strategy of the civilians in the Bush Administration has done little if anything to suppress Al Qaeda''s potential to strike. Given their more numerous bases it would appear Al Qaeda is strategically stronger than before 9/11.

[cariboubarbi]

Obama isn''t even President yet and these crazy rabid neocons are blaming him for Bush''s failures.

It''s time to put aside divisive partisan bickering and come together as ONE nation to get out of the mess we''re in.

[martin9p2]

dejerdman5, .... yes, the ban on stem cell research was motivated by ignorance, and is similar instituting an official policy of creationism. It''s not a "liberal" action to remove the handcuffs from scientists who can create life-saving technologies.

[cariboubarbi]

I have yet to have anyone that could name anything that Obama has ever done to help this country. Yes I know the media had him elected.

Posted by mr22587 at 09:55 AM : Nov 09, 2008



Jeez he''s not even President yet. Can you just relax your partisan hate mongering for one minute?


What has Bush done for this country in 8 years?

[cariboubarbi]

misha128, You have bad info. al qaeda is on the run.

Posted by mr22587 at 09:57 AM : Nov 09, 2008



Our own intelligence says Al Qaeda is as strong or stronger than they were pre-911.

It''s you who has bad information.

[redhawk1021]

I have yet to have anyone that could name anything that Obama has ever done to help this country.

Posted by mr22587 at 09:55 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Overnight our damaged reputation in the rest of the world soared. That''s one thing of the top of my head.

Oh, and the guy doesn''t take office for another two months! I know you''re just looking to have your negative opinion of him validated, but at least give the guy a chance to actually BECOME president before you start sliming him, ok?

[misha128-2009]

misha128, You have bad info. al qaeda is on the run.

Posted by mr22587 at 09:57 AM

Not according to current reports of the intelligence services of the Bush Administration.

[redhawk1021]

Maybe oneday Obama will do something he can take credit for.

Posted by mr22587 at 09:59 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Making the braindead rightwing freaks in this nation suffer miserably certainly counts for something :)

[cariboubarbi]

Maybe oneday Obama will do something he can take credit for.

Posted by mr22587 at 09:59 AM : Nov 09, 2008



Obama isn''t even President yet him simply being elected has done a great deal to repair our reputation and good will around the world.

Perhaps you should let him take office before giving him a partisan slime job.

[otrama]

I find it so odd that people want to insist on a scientific basis for evolution but not a scientific basis for the start of a life.

Could someone explain how they see consistancy in what seems to me like a huge discrepancy?

Seriously, no attacks, just engagement with the issue.

[culturechang]

THey need to rewrite the human trafficking laws to address human trafficking instead of the broad based legislation they have now that allows them to chase adult consensual prostitutes. This is not a federal issue and it will better enable them to focus on real victims instead of using it as a morality crusade.

[cariboubarbi]

Yep, this all ties into the liberal myth that whatever Bush did, simply doing the opposite will make things better.

Posted by michaelt302 at 10:01 AM : Nov 09, 2008




As oposed to staying a failed course...doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

That''s the definition of insanity and that''s what this country has been doing for the last 8 years.

Americans voted overwhelmingly for change.

If you can''t help, just get out of the way.

[otter112]

People need to become more educated on stem cells. To date, there are no treatments using embryonic stem cells, but there are over 70 using adult stem cells. There is new technology allowing scientists to "turn back the clock" and reprogram existing adult stem cells to an earlier state. Why not pursue these noncontroversial treatments instead of supporting the destruction of human life at the earlist stage?

There is no ban on embryonic stem cell research, anyway. Only on Federal funding of it. Why should taxpayer money be used? If it''s as promising as its proponents say, why do they need taxpayer dollars?

It is immoral to destroy human life for the promise of helping other human life. Haven''t we learned that?
Or do many deny the scientific fact that we are destroying human life?

[misha128-2009]

Yep, this all ties into the liberal myth that whatever Bush did, simply doing the opposite will make things better. ...

Posted by michaelt302 at 10:01 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Actually this is a classic example of the Republican binary thinking process everything is yes or no, good or bad. When will Republicans learn the world is not that easily defined? There are many levels of yes/no or good/bad where each event is measured differently dependent on the perspective in which it is being viewed.

[cariboubarbi]

It is immoral to destroy human life for the promise of helping other human life. Haven''''t we learned that?
Or do many deny the scientific fact that we are destroying human life?

Posted by Otter112 at 10:07 AM : Nov 09, 2008




You don''t know what you are talking about.

Besides, all the stem cell lines that would be used are the ones that are thrown in the trash every day as "extra tissue" left over from fertility procedures. Which is more moral, throwing these cells in the trash as is done daily or using them to relieve human suffering and save lives?

[cariboubarbi]

mr22587


Americans voted overwhelmingly for change.

If you can''t help, just get out of the way.

[cariboubarbi]

Obama is his own worst enemy. Give him time and he will destroy himself.

Posted by mr22587 at 10:14 AM : Nov 09, 2008




You are your own worst enemy. You would rather see the country torn apart than give Obama a chance to fix it.

You partisan hate is blinding you.

[Mccarthyaw]

Remember this. Almost 1/2 of America voted against Obama.

Posted by mr22587 at 10:15 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Remember, more people voted for Gore than Bush. Remember, Kerry won 49% of the vote 4 years ago. What is your point?

[ravanseldon]

I''ll try to keep this short.

People, the current version of America DOES NOT WORK! The only way to move forward is to change EVERYTHING. Your tax dollars are NOT, repeat NOT working for YOU. (Unless you are a defense contactor or a shill for big oil.) Under the current iteration, we have lost over 1,000,000 jobs (are you one?) foreclosures of the American Dream number in the millions (are you one?) JUST THIS YEAR ALONE! (Thanks w) The former Soviet Union collapsed very quickly, due to similar foreign and economic policies (are we on the same course?)

Do you REALLY want to stay the course (which remember, didn''t work) or are you brave enough to face a VERY DIFFERENT future- one where you get what you pay for, have to work for, and reap the benefits thereof?

The future is NOW.

[cariboubarbi]

Remember this. Almost 1/2 of America voted against Obama.

Posted by mr22587 at 10:15 AM : Nov 09, 2008



Americans overwhelmingly voted for change.

They rejected smear and fear.

Try something new.

Try working with your fellow Americans for a better future.

[ilsadago]

By agreeing to California''s request, he will effectively kill the auto industry that he has pledged to help. Remember the steel industry? The paper industry? Over-regulation and cheaper foreign products killed them. If California would invest even a fraction of the money spent ''saving'' the environment into public transportation systems and limiting urban sprawl they would put people to work, get people to work. They could give tax breaks to commuters using public trains, buses, ''park and ride'' lots... but no. A state too in love with their cars would rather see other states pay the price.

I would hope that Obama will remember - even if the Democrats don''t - that he got 52% of the vote, not 92%. He still has to be the President of ALL of the people. Beating down the Republicans is short-sighted and foolish. Remember that in these United States, the only thing that stays the same, is that everything changes...about every 2 years or so.

[Mccarthyaw]

Obama was pushed on the American people and the world by the media. I don''''t like it.

Posted by mr22587 at 10:20 AM : Nov 09, 2008

Can you only spew partisan hate? Where is that off button?

[cariboubarbi]

I don''''t like it.

Posted by mr22587 at 10:20 AM : Nov 09, 2008



We all voted and the verdict is in.

Obama will soon be President.

Like it or not.

Americans voted for change.

If you can''t help, just get out of the way.

[be_real]

Obama won by 6%.



Posted by mr22587 at 10:12 AM : Nov 09, 2008



In election numbers, is pretty substantial.

[be_real]

OBAMA is the man, Steam cell research should be allowed.

[shoebox119]

Bush has put this country back to the 1970''s with his archaic policies, both foreign and domestic. Finally, we will have a president who realizes the importance of competing in the 21st century... how refreshing it will be not to feel embarrassed (or afraid) to be an American when I travel overseas.

[shoebox119]

===Obama won by 6%.===
Posted by mr22587

Obama won by 7 million votes, best since 1996.

Posted by rafterman1

______

In the words of *** Cheney: "we have a mandate."