Thank You, Barack Obama

by Will Wilkinson on January 23, 2009

I couldn’t say it better, so I’m just going to cut & paste the entirety of Radley Balko’s post:

Credit where it’s due: Well done, Mr. Obama. I’m sure we’ll have our differences, but afer your first 40+ hours on the job, this libertarian couldn’t be happier.

The tally:

  •  Obama rescinded Bush’s 2001 executive order allowing former presidents, vice presidents, and their heirs to claim executive privilege in determining which of their records get released to the public. Even better, he’s requiring the signature of both his White House counsel and the attorney general before he can classify a document under executive privilege.
  • Issued a memorandum to all executive agencies asking them to come up with a new plan for open government and complying with FOIA requests. He is also instructing three top officials, including the U.S. attorney general, to come up with a new policy on open government. The new policy would replace the existing policy, infamously set by a 2001 memo from John Ashcroft that instructed federal agencies to essentially to take every measure they can to refuse FOIA requests.
  • Put a freeze on the salaries of top White House aides.
  • Suspended the military trials at Gitmo, and is expected to issue an order closing Gitmo as soon as today.
  • Said this:

    “For a long time now there has been too much secrecy in this city. The old rules said that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed. That era is now over. Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known.

    The mere fact that you have the legal power to keep something secret does not mean you should use it. The Freedom of Information Act is perhaps the most powerful instrument we have for making our government honest and transparent and holding it accountable. I expect my administration not only to live up to the letter but the spirit of this law.”

    Yes, it’s only been one day. But this is mighty impressive. Obama’s top priority upon taking office was to sign orders rolling back his predecessor’s expansion of executive power. Put another way, Obama’s top priority upon taking office was to institute limits on his own power.

    • That’s something even a cynic like me can celebrate.

    This is all fantastic news, and a great relief. This is change I can believe in, in fact.

    • Anne K. Jeffrey
      In response to your inquery about check # 34228 that has not been cashed. I do not have the original check. Please stop payment and reissue the check. Thank you
    • Guest
      The user deleted this comment.
    • Casey Cox
      I hope that Barack Obama nationalizes our health care system so that everyone can receive free/ or next to free medical care. I shouldn't have to move to Canada to get free health care. Everyone should watch the movie "sicko" to get a better idea of what is going on. It's about time we as American's clean out the elitist garbage this country seems to thrive on.
    • Laurie
      (HTML correction:)

      Well, I'm not that pleased: On day three, Obama issued a memorandum allowing to fund abortions not only in the US, but all around the world with taxpayers' money - a move we libertarians should oppose.

      As for Guantanamo: It's overdue to shut it down - as John McCain, Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee would have done as well had they won the election, representing three important wings in the Republican Party - so that's hardly a partisan issue. And we should never forget that it was the Clinton administration that ran an extralegal detention camp on Guantanamo:

      "Clinton's Guantanamo: How the Democratic president set the stage for a land without law.

      We sometimes forget that during the Clinton presidency, the United States ran an extralegal detention camp on Guantanamo—and went to federal court to defend its right to do so... Guantanamo under Clinton produced its own share of suffering and abuses—and perhaps most important for today, the court decision that shut it down was eventually wiped off the books, thanks to legal maneuvers by the Clinton Justice Department...

      [Clinton's] record on Guantanamo was an ugly one. Despite signals on the campaign trail that he intended to shut down the camp, Clinton changed his mind. As a result, the refugees remained, even after he assumed office, in leaky barracks with poor sanitation, surrounded by razor wire and guard towers. They responded with a hunger strike, and after raucous protests against their confinement, a number were thrown in the naval brig as if they were criminals... Worse still, federal authorities refused to release the sickest Haitians, even though military physicians on Guantanamo lacked the means to treat them.

      The Clinton White House justified this atrocious conduct in terms that sound strikingly familiar today. Justice Department attorneys maintained that foreigners held by the United States at Guantanamo Bay have absolutely no legal rights, whether under the Constitution, federal statutes, or international law. According to this logic, the Clinton White House was free to treat the detainees however it pleased..."

      http://www.slate.com/id/2132979/?nav=ais
    • MC
      Why should libertarians be any more opposed to funding family planning overseas than they should to foreign aid in general?

      What does Clinton's policy towards Gitmo have to do with Obama's?
    • barry
      On so-called "family planning": Because libertarians are primarily about defense of the individual, and the pro-abortion order extends foreign aid to the attack of pre-born persons, thus making it more evil than foreign aid in its common, odious form. Libertarians are inconsistent when they look the other way when the state attacks certain classes of human beings it decides are undesirable.

      On Gitmo: You're right. Nothing.
    • what should have rights?
      Individual human? Individual ape? Individual fetus? Individual dog?

      Most libertarians are pro "born humans", some are pro the other three too. To me, the well-being of the other three is important but they do not have human rights. Fetus is the least human of them.

      It is important, that the limit of humanity is strict. To me, birth and fertilization seem to be the best alternatives, learning to speak would be a limit too easily twisted. My choice is the birth.

      Some apes understand so much that they perhaps should, to some extent, be treated, as having limited human rights.

      Anyway, the definition of a libertarian does not imply "pro life" or "pro choice" (unless you fix a certain definition of "human", but most libertarians would not agree with your definition).
    • Laurie
      Well, I'm not that pleased: On day three, Obama <URL=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OBAMA_ABORTION_BAN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>issued a memorandum</URL> allowing to fund abortions not only in the US, but all around the world with taxpayers' money - a move we libertarians should oppose.

      As for Guantanamo: It's overdue to shut it down - as John McCain, Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee would have done as well had they won the election, representing three important wings in the Republican Party - so that's hardly a partisan issue. And we should never forget that it was the Clinton administration that ran an <URL=http://www.slate.com/id/2132979/?nav=ais>extralegal detention camp on Guantanamo</URL>:

      <QUOTE>"Clinton's Guantanamo: How the Democratic president set the stage for a land without law.

      We sometimes forget that during the Clinton presidency, the United States ran an extralegal detention camp on Guantanamo—and went to federal court to defend its right to do so... Guantanamo under Clinton produced its own share of suffering and abuses—and perhaps most important for today, the court decision that shut it down was eventually wiped off the books, thanks to legal maneuvers by the Clinton Justice Department...

      [Clinton's] record on Guantanamo was an ugly one. Despite signals on the campaign trail that he intended to shut down the camp, Clinton changed his mind. As a result, the refugees remained, even after he assumed office, in leaky barracks with poor sanitation, surrounded by razor wire and guard towers. They responded with a hunger strike, and after raucous protests against their confinement, a number were thrown in the naval brig as if they were criminals... Worse still, federal authorities refused to release the sickest Haitians, even though military physicians on Guantanamo lacked the means to treat them.

      The Clinton White House justified this atrocious conduct in terms that sound strikingly familiar today. Justice Department attorneys maintained that foreigners held by the United States at Guantanamo Bay have absolutely no legal rights, whether under the Constitution, federal statutes, or international law. According to this logic, the Clinton White House was free to treat the detainees however it pleased..."</QUOTE>
    • John Galt
      B. Hussein Obama has the most liberal voting record. Do you really think he will stand for liberty?
    • Stephen
      John Galt, aren't you a fantasy character? Does that mean that you have met Mickey Mouse? I'd like to hear his thoughts on politics and economics too.
    • fishbane
      What has he done so far?

      Appeals to boring talking points from the election don't get much traction around folks who actually pay attention. Save those for your apathetic relatives - it will work better.
    • Mike Rappaport
      It is not obvious that a libertarian wants to end executive privilege. Sure ex post it is better to have documents released, but ex ante one wants to preserve the freedom for people to propose policy options. Without more, your argument here is no different than saying we should tax the rich, because that will give money to the poor. Ex post, yes, but not ex ante.
    • expat
      and you are so naive, to believe him? You don't think that istead of salary increases, he is going to give them HUGE bonuses.
      Come back to earth.
    • We'll see. Maybe the pay moves are just symbolic politics. But if the stuff on executive privilege, FOIA compliance, terrorism trials, Guantanamo, and torture stick -- and I think there is a good chance of it -- I'll be pretty happy.
    • John V
      While I voted for neither McCain nor Obama, I preferred Obama to McCain.

      And this post by Will is an example of why.

      Yes, I can cringe til the cows come home on many matters of economic policy but THIS kind of stuff is where the president has the most latitude and fewest obstacles to enact change.

      I like it so far. Sure, there will be many matters of disagreement...but many of those matters require deliberation and tempering from Congress.
    • mk
      Yeah, and Congress is totally going to pull him in the right direction...

      Ah well.
    • Dave Smith
      I can still be cynical, at least about Obama overturning Bush's the excutive priv policies. He may have done that just so it is easier to get Bush, not becuase of any personal nobility.
    • Paul O'Pinion
      I agree with all except Gitmo. Don't let these terrorists infiltrate our prisons. That will be a problem. Also, they are not criminals in the classic sense. They are very dangerous, suicidal killers!
    • > http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily...

      Bed-wetting. The only risk from bringing Gitmo detainees into the US justice system is exposing the Gitmo kangaroo court.

      I don't find the justice system of 3rd world juntas attractive. In this I am in a 60% majority (per current polling on US citizens' appetite for sanctioned torture). I weep for the US, because 40% of the population is more than enough to fully staff a totalitarian prison system, all in the name of our "safety".

      Allow me to preemptively apologize. At this point, I am usually chastised for not supporting the open discussion of opinions. I apologize for crushing the tender flowers of free expression.
    • Yancey Ward
      All laudable decisions, but color me cynical. Words are fine, but actions speak louder. I hope the follow through is actually meaningful.
    • Number 6
      My feelings exactly. While I'm not a fan of his economics, I am so far very pleased with President Obama.
    • Number 6
      My feelings exactly. While I'm not a fan of his economics, I am so far very pleased with President Obama.
    blog comments powered by Disqus

    Previous post:

    Next post: