Unprecedented Power
Over the last 3 1/2 years, we've seen the President circumvent Congress to accomplish things that his office does not have the authority to do. Executive order after executive order has been signed. But until now, we have not seen a bipartisan effort to hand over so much power directly to Obama.
Treasurer of the United States, Deputy Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, appointees to the Department of Defense, Homeland Security and even the Justice Department. These people can now be appointed without Senate confirmation. That's right, folks. Now our messiah can appoint anyone he chooses to these positions (and more) without any governmental process.
This wasn't something that barely skimped through congress, either. Sweeping majority in both the Senate and the House!
The people we send to Washington are no longer creating budgets. They are no longer involved in this president's policy making, as he's found a way around that. They are willingly withdrawing themselves from the process of appointing senior government officials. If they are no longer actively representing the American people, what the hell are they doing up there?
No President, regardless of party, should have this type of power. If the Senate is taking too long to approve appointees, then the Senate needs to find ways to streamline its process. Withdrawing completely from situation is absolutely the wrong answer.
- Comment (8)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments:
Oct '10
Re: Unprecedented Power
"If they are no longer actively representing the American people, what the hell are they doing up there?"
Getting as much for themselves as they can?
Sep '11
Re: Unprecedented Power
If we have so many positions that need confirmation that they are backlogged, that seems to indicate that we have too many positions...
Edited on August 1, 2012 at 11:38pmJul '10
Re: Unprecedented Power
We are watching the fabric of our Republic unravel, and the only answer you'll get is wait for the election. Of course if we don't win that election, we're evidently supposed to consign ourselves to the dismantling of representation and checks and balances.
Dec '10
Re: Unprecedented Power
Over 1200 positions need confirmation currently. This moves about 170 more to the streamline list where if no senator objects the nomination bypasses committee hearings and goes directly to a floor vote. No one will be automatically confirmed via this route. The full senate still has to vote on each appointment. However, I'll lean Milton Friedman's way and praise government inefficiency. Anything that slows down the speed with which the government can create new ways to pick our pockets has my support.
Apr '11
Re: Unprecedented Power
We're at the end of the Roman Republic. Our Sulla, Marius and Julius are waiting in the wings. Remember that there was still a Roman Senate 500 years after Julius Caesar was murdered. A group of men walking around Rome in their pruple lined togas as though they actually did something constructive. The emporors went along with the charade and it had to have been one of the biggest jokes ever.
May '10
Re: Unprecedented Power
The text of the bill filed with the Library of Congress says that the positions listed in the bill no longer need senate approval.
The "covered positions" of this section are defined as;
Section 4 contrasts that by saying that paperwork will be streamlined for nominations that still "require appointment by and with the advice and consent of the Senate."
This seems (to me) to say that there is no vote one way or another on these "covered" positions. Does a floor vote not count as "consent" from the senate?
Edited on August 2, 2012 at 12:45amMay '11
Re: Unprecedented Power
God help us if BO gets another term. The only thing I can think of here is that Republicans must be saying "But our guy will have those same powers when he gets in."
If BO gets a second term, will non-Progressives ever get back into power?
Dec '10
Re: Unprecedented Power
Benjamin Carter
The text of the bill filed with the Library of Congress says that the positions listed in the bill no longer need senate approval.
The "covered positions" of this section are defined as;
Section 4 contrasts that by saying that paperwork will be streamlined for nominations that still "require appointment by and with the advice and consent of the Senate."
This seems (to me) to say that there is no vote one way or another on these "covered" positions. Does a floor vote not count as "consent" from the senate? · 9 minutes ago
That's what I get for reading about it in the WaPo.