During his campaign, the left-leaning New York Times editorial board cheered Joe Biden on and then celebrated when he ultimately won the presidential election. But recently they gave some criticism on the way he is sending out executive orders left and right.
Their headline, “Ease up on the Executive Actions, Joe,” wasn’t harsh by any means and the article itself early pointed out that the new president may be relying too heavily on executive orders. Since being sworn in just over a week ago, Biden has already signed off on 19 orders, that’s a new record. These orders address a wide range of issues including climate change, the Keystone Pipeline, and immigration.
But the casual article left Biden’s communication’s director fuming.
With executive orders, there is always another presidential election just a few years off, threatening to upend everything. This creates instability and uncertainty that can carry significant economic as well as human costs. https://t.co/1nhQusuQ5r
— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) January 28, 2021
“But this is no way to make law. A polarized, narrowly divided Congress may offer Mr. Biden little choice but to employ executive actions or see his entire agenda held hostage,” the board stated. “These directives, however, are a flawed substitute for legislation. They are intended to provide guidance to the government and need to work within the discretion granted the executive by existing law or the Constitution … [T]hey are not meant to serve as an end run around the will of Congress. By design, such actions are more limited in what they can achieve than legislation, and presidents who overreach invite intervention by the courts.”
It’s true that executive orders can be reversed with a quick stroke of the next president’s pen, just as Biden is doing to former President Trump and him to Barack Obama and so on.
“Undoing some of Mr. Trump’s excesses is necessary, but Mr. Biden’s legacy will depend on his ability to hammer out agreements with Congress,” the board continued.
While the newspaper’s criticism came from a place of sympathy, communications director Kate Bedingfield was fuming, nonetheless.
As the NYT ed board criticizes President Biden this am for taking swift executive action to reverse the most egregious actions of the Trump Admin, I can’t help but recall that during the primary they encouraged voters to consider what a president could accomplish through exec 1/
— Ben LaBolt (@WHCommsDir) January 28, 2021
As the NYT ed board criticizes President Biden this am for taking swift executive action to reverse the most egregious actions of the Trump Admin, I can’t help but recall that during the primary they encouraged voters to consider what a president could accomplish through exec 1/
— Ben LaBolt (@WHCommsDir) January 28, 2021
Action. So my question is which actions that the President took to reverse Donald Trump’s executive orders would they have liked to see him not pursue? /2
— Ben LaBolt (@WHCommsDir) January 28, 2021
While the Times supported Biden all the way through the general election, they did not endorse him for the Democratic ticket. They instead went with Senator Amy Klobuchar and Senator Elizabeth Warren who went on to win a total of zero primaries.
