Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
As The Hill reports, a tiff has developed between Rep. Jeff Landry, a Republican representing southeast Louisiana, and Michael Bromwich, the “drilling chief” for the Obama administration. Bromwhich’s official title is “director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE).”
Landry is angry because BOEMRE has been slow in approving offshore drilling permits. Consequently, on September 2, he made an unannounced visit to the New Orleans office of BOEMRE. Once he arrived, however, staff refused to meet with him.
As the New Orleans Times Picayune reported, Landry said the staff acted like “the CIA and Gestapo.”
This angered Bromwich, who said that Landry needs to apologize. Landry refused and instead said that Bromwich needs to apologize. Bromwich doubled down and directed his staff not to honor an agreement to meet with Landry on September 30.
Part of my class on Congress discusses the “oversight” function of Congress. “Oversight” means activities, like Landry’s, where a legislator investigates, and sometimes mildly pressures, executive-branch bureaucrats to act in certain ways. To a novice student of American politics, such behavior might seem puzzling. Isn’t BOEMRE part of the executive branch? Why, then, is someone from the legislative branch telling it how to do its job?
Such behavior, however, is common. And usually, executive-branch officials are very accommodative when members of Congress make requests such as Landry’s.
In my judgment, the unorthodox response was Bromwich’s, not Landry’s.
Here’s why. Like a chess player, Landry is thinking three moves ahead. One weapon that he possesses is Congress’s subpoena power. A House committee or subcommittee could hold hearings and force Bromwich and other BOEMRE staff to explain why they have been so slow to issue permits.
Another weapon is the budgeting process. Landry could wait for the vote on the appropriations bill that funds BOEMRE, and he coud attach riders to cut the bureau’s budget. Even nastier, he could attach a rider to cut the salary of Bromwich. Assuming that his fellow Republicans agree, Landry could easily navigate such rider through the House.
If he does, the president cannot save Bromwich. That is, Obama can only veto or sign the entire appropriations bill. He cannot veto the particular rider that Landry might add. And if Obama vetoes the entire appropriations bill, then he cuts to zero the entire budget of several bureaus and agencies. It’s very unlikely that Obama would do that.
The Senate could save Bromwich. That is, if Landry successfully adds such a rider, the Senate, in its version of the appropriations bill, could delete the rider. The issue would then have to be resolved in a House-Senate conference committee.
But I’m not so sure the Senate would want to save Bromwich. All Senate Republicans, I suspect, would side with Landry. So would, I believe, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.). Although a Democrat, I doubt that she is happy that BOEMRE is hampering job growth in Louisiana.
Further, a number of other Democrats will have “institutional preferences” that side with Landry. That is, they want to keep the oversight power of Congress strong. When a bureaucrat, such as Bromwich, tries to challenge that power, members of Congress often resist.
I could be wrong, but my bet is that Bromwich will eventually recognize all this and direct BOEMRE staff to meet with Landry. The Founding Fathers, I believe, intended Congress to be more powerful than the executive branch. I suspect that those intentions will be on display when Landry and Bromwich finally settle this dispute.
- Comment (12)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
May '11
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
As my 3 year old neighbor boy used to say (quoting his dad), "You in twoubow now!"
Aug '10
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
Good for Landry, one can only guess at what Bromwich's orders really are.
From what we have seen from the administration and their empowerment of all the wrong people (Van Jones, Lisa Jackson, etc) their brazen attempts to turn off the lights across the country must be defused.
Louisiana (home of "Vote for the Crook") is a murky place politically and there are plenty of long knives lying around for the politicians to use.
When do you think someone will link the Sierra Club( instead of Geo Bush) to Katrina ?
Edited on Sep 21, 2011 at 10:29amJun '10
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
Before we're through Bromwich (the self-important jerk) will doing the equivalent of shining Representative Landry's shoes.
Just another incident that proves Richard Weaver's definition of bureaucracy: “Power without wisdom.”
Sep '10
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
The GOP will cave. They always do.
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
Do keep us posted. It should be fun watching this get worked out.
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
I'm with Paul; do keep us posted.
My, Tim, but I just love having you with us on Ricochet. Not only do you know how to pick a good fight, you love reporting on people who know how to pick good fights.
Jul '10
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
And yet We always remain hopeful. Boggles the Mind.
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
Peter Robinson: I'm with Paul; do keep us posted.
My, Tim, but I just love having you with us on Ricochet. Not only do you know how to pick a good fight, you love reporting on people who know how to pick good fights. · Sep 21 at 1:39pm
Including Pacquiao and de la Hoya!
Dec '10
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
I say give them clubs and televise it.
This type of struggle between officials is exactly what the founders wanted to distract the government from struggling against the citizens. I applaud every fight they get into that interferes with creating onerous laws and regulations.
Mar '11
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
My money is actually on Congress here. You see, this sort of affront transcends party lines, and after 3 years of arm twisting by Team O the Dems in Congress want their prerogatives and powers back. EVERYONE in Congress knows when their turf is threatened. They'll move lockstep on this one.
Apr '11
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
This actually fits a pattern I have noticed with this administration; they are extremely inept in the actual business of governing. The administration seems to go out of its way to pick fights either with local officials, the legislative and judicial branches, or the opposition party. It makes little sense because most of these fights accomplish nothing and are bad politics to boot. In the normal course of business while there is always friction between these groups skillful administrations pick their battles wisely and engage in as few battles as possible. The reason is even victories are likely to cause problems down the road as eventually you find yourself needing the help of the other side. It seems like team O never learned these lessons or, perhaps they are now learning these lessons the hard way.
May '10
Re: Pay Attention to this Inter-Branch Dispute; My Bet’s on Congress
This fits in with one of my favorite parts of my twitter feed from Hot Air: "Obamateurism of the Day."