These Two Trump Executive Orders Get Little Love From Voters. Why?

Americans have been largely pleased with President Donald Trump’s deluge of executive orders. But not all of them. Public support is weak for his order to withdraw the U.S. from the World Health Organization and the Paris climate treaty. This is curious. One is clearly a political organization, the other a useless and wasteful effort. The failure by a significant swath of our countrymen to recognize this is worrisome.

This is actually the second time Trump pulled the U.S. from the WHO. The first departure was in 2020. It pleased us then that no longer would this country “take part in its kleptocratic incompetence and its cozying up to dictators and tyrants, including its biggest influencer, China.” The WHO’s reckoning, we said at the time, “is long overdue.”

Of course Joe Biden put the country back under the WHO’s thumb on his first day in office in 2021, even though it was clear that leaving had hurt no none. Despite this, our I&I/TIPP poll found that only 38% of Americans agree, either strongly (22%) or somewhat (16%) with quitting the WHO.

Critics point out that at one time, when it followed its original mission, the WHO had value.

“Unfortunately, the WHO has expanded its mission over the years to areas that only tangentially relate to public health, such as issuing alcohol consumption and dietary guidelines,” says Cato Institute senior fellow Jeffrey A. Singer. “Such issues are more aptly defined as private health, i.e., matters that don’t cause harm to others.”

Five years ago, the WHO was infamously deferential to China in regard to the COVID-19 pandemic. It failed – or maybe declined? – “to confront China over its lack of transparency and cooperation during the outbreak,” says Brett Schaefer when he was a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

“Had China been more transparent and cooperative, many lives could have been saved and economic damage avoided in the U.S. and around the world,” says Schaefer, but the WHO played politics and “was too willing to take Chinese assurances at face value and too slow to respond to the initial COVID-19 outbreak.”

While no other country’s taxpayers fund the WHO the way America’s taxpayers do, it is yet another multilateral organization that behaves as if its job is to oppose and confound America and is embraced by the establishment as if it’s indispensable. Its director general is not a medical doctor but a member of “a Marxist-Leninist Ethiopian political party that analysts have listed as a perpetrator of terrorism,” Breitbart reported in 2020. It is a corrupt syndicate that pays lavish salaries and hands privileged perks to useless bureaucrats.

Is there a more inept, wasteful, perpetually failing organization in the world? Outside of the United Nations, of which the WHO is a part, the answer has to be “no.” That any American would want his or her country to be a part of it is breathtaking.

Support for walking away from the Paris Agreement is similar to that of removing ourselves from the morass of the WHO. Only 39% of Americans believe, either strongly (23%) or somewhat (16%), that we should drop the climate treaty. More than four in 10 – 41% – oppose Trump’s order to vacate either strongly (29%) or somewhat (12%). The next three paragraphs, which are repeated from a previous I&I editorial (because we can’t say it any better than we did then), are for the 20% who said they weren’t sure.

The U.S. should have never been a part of the Paris Agreement. Committing our country to cut greenhouse gas emissions, which means reductions in fossil fuel use, is foolish. Reaching the made-from-thin-air global temperature target: requires government mandates, restrictions and increased spending on politically trendy but expensive and unreliable renewable energy; stunts economic growth; limits our choices, leaving many of them to be made by globalist elites; and is an abdication of our national sovereignty.

It is simultaneously meaningless and dishonest, a solution looking for a problem that doesn’t exist.

‘The Paris Agreement has always been an expensive farce, a symbolic gesture masquerading as a global solution,’ writes Charles Rotter in the Watts Up With That? blog. ‘Its main purpose? To transfer wealth from productive nations to the politically corrupt under the guise of “climate justice.” Of course, China — the world’s largest emitter — sits pretty with vague promises and no actual obligations. Trump’s exit from this scam is as much common sense as it is a necessity.’

There are far too many people in influential positions, from government to media, and too many everyday Americans who believe that without powerful government agencies, international non-governmental organizations, splashy multilateral agreements and bureaucracies filled with “experts,” the world will fall into chaos and misery.

It’s the guidance of the elites, they want the rest of us to believe, that keeps the world turning. How could we even exist without a federal Department of Education and Department of Energy, a United Nations, and reckless pacts that sell out our sovereignty?

Most frustrating is that our poll indicates that even some Republicans are unable to comprehend a smaller, less-intrusive state that declines to link with other governments and non-government organizations that are interested only in power and resources. One in five oppose Trump’s order to withdraw from the WHO, 16% are against his order to abandon the Paris deal.

Free men and free markets, not administrators, government programs, dreamy internationalists and skilled grifters have produced prosperity and health unlike any seen before in history. That so many Americans, many of them ostensibly in favor of smaller government and local rather than remote governance, don’t recognize this is a bit discouraging. Clearly there is still much educating to do.

Thank you for referencing that article MtnClimber.

"Public support is weak for his order to withdraw the U.S. from the World Health Organization and the Paris climate treaty."

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

The problem with any weak public support for PDJT47's U.S. withdraw from WHO and Paris climate treaty is this imo. As a consequence of many voters probably not being up to speed with fed's constitutionally limited powers, most voters are likely clueless that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to dictate healthcare policy for the states, or to police environmental protections for the states.

In other words U.S. financial participation in WHO, along with politically correct global climate policing, were unconstitutional expansions of the federal government's powers and influence, U.S. taxpayers getting ripped off.

In fact, the Supreme Court had clarified that the feds cannot use their power to make treaties as a back door to expand the fed's constitutionally limited powers.

”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
"The obvious and decisive answer to this, of course, is that no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution." —Reid v. Covert, 1957.

The ultimate remedy (imo) for unconstitutionally big federal government is for PDJT47 to lead the states to put a stop to unconstitutional federal taxing and spending, effectively seceding ALL the states from the unconstitutionally big federal government by doing so, by repealing the 16th (16A; direct taxes) and 17th (17A; popular voting for federal senators) Amendments.

More specifically, post-16&17A politicians eventually discovered that they could promise voters, who have probably never really studied the federal government's constitutionally limited powers, every unconstitutional federal social spending program under the sun to try to get themselves elected. Low-information voters ultimately took the federal “freebies” bait and elected them, and then reelected them, unthinkingly filling Congress with Constitution-ignoring career lawmakers over time by doing so.

Once elected, compromised lawmakers would then abuse their 16A powers simply by establishing the constitutionally indefensible federal social spending programs that they had promised to low-information voters on the campaign trail.

Since PDJT47 is open to amending the Constitution, he needs to destroy the very corrupt, tax-hungry Democratic and RINO political party taxing and spending machine by leading the states to put a stop to unconstitutional taxes by repealing 16&17A, effectively seceding ALL the states from the unconstitutionally big federal government by doing so.

Let's call the repeal amendment the Boston Tea Party II Amendment.

The fat lady sings.

PDJT47 will then have a constitutionally limited peacetime power federal government which will allow him to spend more time on the golf courses as he finishes his second term.

But until 16&17A are gone, political party abuse of 16A, which is also weakening our 4th Amendment protections imo, will continue to be the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for organized crime imo.

If Trump doesn't lead the states to get rid of these misguided amendments, then it wouldn't be surprising to see Kamala Harris in the Oval Office in a generation imo.

"16th Amendment: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived [emphasis added], without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
"4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“If the tax be not proposed for the common defence, or general welfare, but for other objects, wholly extraneous, (as for instance, for propagating Mahometanism among the Turks, or giving aids and subsidies to a foreign nation, to build palaces for its kings, or erect monuments to its heroes,) it would be wholly indefensible upon constitutional principles [emphases added].” — Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2 (1833).
The congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as follows.
”Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government [emphases added]. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country.” —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
(again) "From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
“Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors, shall all become wolves [emphasis added]. It seems to be the law of our general nature.” - Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Edward Carrington January 16, 1787)
Pelosi: "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." (non-FR; 6 sec.)
Illegals are indeed getting immediate Social Security, contrary to Democrat claims (7.11.24)
Arizona Sheriff: Illegal Immigrants Being Handed $5,000 Visa Gift Cards, Cell Phones, And Plane Tickets (12.7.23)
Democrats [and RINOs] Are Terrified Of An Educated And Informed Public (3.12.23)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.