If Democrats cannot support a limited Executive Order

[bigtree]

5. they're trying to get support for Barney Frank's bill instead, to make the change permanent

. . . this is much like the period before DADT repeal passed. There was certainly cause to provide cover and relief for those caught in the way of the regulation, but there was also a serious effort to get support for permanent legislation so any future president couldn't just undo the change with a stroke of his executive pen.

The WH said that this is a position they're taking, 'for now, which means this President isn't going to wait forever for the legislative process to produce a remedy. I understand the relief an executive order would provide, but I also understand the political shitstorm that would follow an executive decision by this President in an election year. That could very well put the lid on the Frank measure for good. So, I can understand this position if I think back to the effort to repeal DADT and I focus on what it will take to advance Rep. Franks measure.