We Need Bilateral Decision Making, Not Unilateral

Re-examining a decision from earlier in President Trump's administration provides context for how the office has been utilized. The issue is the change of the name the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. My initial response was marked by surprise.  But after considering the issue, I cannot support the idea that the name should not have been changed based on tradition. If tradition was the reason for keeping the name, then we should look farther back than the 350 years the body of water has held the name the Gulf of Mexico.  Historical records indicate that the body of water has held various names over time, including those used by Indigenous peoples prior to the past 350 years.

The central concern raised is that the name change was decided unilaterally by the Trump administration, without consultation or consensus from established authorities such as the U.S. Board on Geographic Names (BGN) or the International Astronomical Union (IAU). These organizations have developed protocols to ensure scientific clarity and consistent global usage, often requiring names to adhere to approved themes and undergo official review. By bypassing these processes, the administration deviated from standard practices intended to foster collaboration and reduce confusion.

Effective leadership in a democratic society relies on bilateral decision-making, with input from all stakeholders affected by policy changes. Issuing executive orders without broad consultation undermines this principle and can challenge the spirit of cooperative governance.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

115 Years of War Since 1900 for America

Since 1900, the United States has been at war or engaged in major military conflicts for roughly 100 to 115 years. A few nations have participated in more conflicts, but that does not diminish the extraordinary amount of resources the United States has devoted to warfare over this period. These estimates come from reliable sources, including the Library of Congress and other authoritative conflict records. Some of these wars can be argued as justified. In my view, World War II, the Gulf War, and the war in Afghanistan had legitimate grounds to some degree. Yet many other conflicts might have been resolved peacefully—or avoided entirely—had different choices been made. This does not mean the United States, or any nation, should retreat into isolationism. Global problems require global participation. When a nation removes itself from the table, it leaves space for authoritarian actors or non‑state armed groups to step in and shape outcomes. Beyond material costs, many sources estim...
Read more

Immigrants are Not Committing More Crime

Editor Notes:  Are we truly focused on reducing crime, addressing immigration, or simply stoking fear? If the goal is to lower crime rates, then the attention should be on those statistically committing more offenses—native-born citizens—rather than scapegoating immigrants. ( Link ) If opposition to immigration is the stance, that's understandable, even if I don’t personally agree with it. However, that position can be argued without fueling fear across entire immigrant communities.  The reality is that the GOP, under Trump’s dominant influence, relies on fear-mongering as a political strategy. They see it as a tool to mobilize voters and maintain their grip on power. Fear can be effective in driving political engagement, but it comes at the cost of facts, fairness, and a more constructive dialogue on crime, immigration and damage to due process.   No, immigrants aren't more likely to commit crimes than US-born, despite Trump's border speech Published 11:26 a.m. ET...
Read more

Grievance with Trump and the Republican Party

The follow is my list of the grievances I have with President Trump and the Republican party.  1. Executive Overreach President Trump has asserted direct control over areas traditionally and constitutionally reserved for Congress. He uses executive orders as de facto legislation, directing agencies to implement the President’s personal agenda and not an agenda that is beneficial for the country. This expansion of unilateral authority bypasses the legislative process and weakens the separation of powers. 2. Failure of Congressional Oversight Congress has not exercised adequate oversight of the executive branch, enabling expansions of presidential authority in emergency powers, tariffs, immigration, and the use of acting officials. This neglect weakens the rule of law and undermines democratic accountability. 3. Misuse of National Emergency Powers The President has declared national emergencies without legitimate justification, using them to bolster executive orders rathe...
Read more