FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Barack Obama won the White House last week on a message of "change." That’s something that's easier said than done in Washington.
But the president-elect's transition chief John Podesta told "Fox News Sunday" that Obama plans to use his executive powers to make an immediate impact when he takes office in January.
Podesta said, "As a candidate, Senator Obama said that he wanted all the Bush executive orders reviewed and decide which ones should be kept and which ones should be repealed."
For example, that could mean reversing President Bush's policies on stem-cell research and drilling for oil and natural gas among other things.
Podesta said there is a lot the new president can do using his executive authority without waiting for Congress.
President Bush discovered this early on and used executive orders and signing statements to bypass Congress and implement his agenda whether anyone else in the government thought it was a good idea or not.
Here’s my question to you: What does it mean when President-elect Obama plans to start his first term using executive orders?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Jon from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania writes:
It means we can get past the Bush years real fast. Bush misused his power on so many different occasions that Obama's undoing them is only fitting.
Barbara from North Carolina writes:
Cancelling all the unconstitutional crap that "W" put in place to protect himself, Cheney, Rove, etc.
Dan from Chantilly, Virginia writes:
Right idea, wrong implementation. An abuse of power for the greater good is still an abuse of power, even if you're using it to undo someone else's abuse of power. After all, who defines 'the greater good'? Last I checked, that should be the job of the people (or at least the elected officials in Congress), not the president.
Tom from Avon, Maine writes:
It means that President-elect Obama isn't going to waste any time turning this ship's bow into the waves.
Roy from Chicago, Illinois writes:
When the previous President has resorted to executive orders as opposed to vetoes to further his agenda, I do not see an issue with Obama beginning his term negating some of the most irresponsible Bush orders, such as stem cell research, and opening roadless areas to development. There are some things we need changed immediately.
Dave from Denver, Colorado writes:
Executive order vs. congressional process. I wonder how an issue is allowed to be decided through the sole discretion of the President, and when it is required to go through Congress. Since there are hundreds of orders signed by Bush, their retention or repeal by Obama could make a significant impact. Positive or negative is something left to be seen.