Many of you are probably already aware of the president's penchant for using Executive Orders to implement much of his agenda.  You may not be aware of the recent (May 14, 1998) Executive Order relating to "FEDERALISM." 

While this  EO starts out in a rather bland manner that might cause one to overlook it, it contains some very serious implications for the states if it is allowed to stand.  It will, in effect, grant federal agencies regulatory powers over most state functions.

Section 3(d) of this EO reads:

It is important to recognize the distinction between matters of national or multi-state scope (which may justify Federal action) and matters that are merely common to the States (which may not justify Federal action because individual States, acting individually or together, may effectively deal with them).  Matters of national or multi-state scope that justify Federal action may arise in a variety of circumstances, including:

(3) When there is a need for uniform national standards. [This could cover almost anything.]

(4) When decentralization increases the costs of government thus imposing additional burdens on the taxpayer. [Does anyone think this is really out of concern for the taxpayer?  This is so broad that it could include virtually any function of government.]

(5) When States have not adequately protected individual rights and liberties. [Who will determine if the States have adequately protected such rights?  Another all inclusive door through which federal agencies can intrude.]

(6) When States would be reluctant to impose necessary regulations because of fears that regulated business activity will relocate to other States. [Another open door for federalism.]

(7) When placing regulatory authority at the State or local level would undermine regulatory goals because of high costs or demands for specialized expertise will effectively place the regulatory matter beyond the scope of State authorities. [According to whose specifications?]