President Obama’s Creepy Executive Order: "Putting the economy on a permanent war footing"

[onenote]

134. The official Democratic Party seal was already on it from 1994

The EO issued by President Obama replaced an EO that was issued by President Clinton in 1994. Despite what has been written by some, the amendment to that EO made by bush in 2003 was non substantive. In fact, these are the changes, in toto, made by bush to the Clinton-era EO:

EO 13286:

Sec. 24. Executive Order 12919 of June 3, 1994 (‘‘National Defense Industrial
Resources Preparedness’’), is amended by:

(a) striking ‘‘The Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency (‘‘Director,
FEMA’’)’’ in section 104(b) and inserting ‘‘The Secretary of Homeland
Security (‘‘the Secretary’’)’’ in lieu thereof;
(b) striking ‘‘The Director, FEMA,’’ in sections 201(c) and 601(f) and
inserting ‘‘The Secretary’’ in lieu thereof;
(c) striking ‘‘the Director, FEMA,’’ wherever it appears in sections 201(e),
202(c), 305, 501, 701(e), and 802(e), and inserting ‘‘the Secretary’’ in lieu
thereof; and
(d) inserting ‘‘the Department of Homeland Security,’’ after ‘‘Attorney General,’’
in section 801."

The EO itself,as has been the case since the 1950 Defense Production Act was enacted, has been largely the carrying out of statutory directions delegating responsibility to the Executive Branch. The 1950 Act has been amended in various ways nearly 20 times in the past 62 years. As best I can tell, the changes made by President Obama in the 18 year old Clinton EO (as non-substantively amended 9 years ago by bush) largely update the EO to reflect changes made by Congress aimed at encouraging more energy exploration -- for example, a lot of biofuels funding is done under the heading of actions taken pursuant to the planning authorized by the Act as implemented by the EO.

In any event, since you are the one claiming that the EO makes substantive changes, it seems like the burden would be on you to show at least one example of such.