Senior Democrat Says Obama's Czars Unconstitutional

Jan 2007
Senior Democrat Says Obama's Czars Unconstitutional

For entire story:

Senator Byrd wrote a letter to President Obama in February, criticizing the president’s strategy of creating czars to manage important areas of national policy. Senator Byrd said that these appointments violate both the constitutional system of checks and balances and the constitutional separation of powers, and is a clear attempt to evade congressional oversight. (Didn’t this White House promise unprecedented transparency?)

And Senator Byrd is exactly correct. The Constitution commands that government officers with significant authority (called “principal officersâ€) are nominated by the president but then are subject to a confirmation vote by the U.S. Senate. And principal officers include not only cabinet-level department heads, but go five levels deep in executive appointments, to include assistant secretaries and deputy undersecretaries.

Inferior officers are appointed either by the president, cabinet-level officers, or the courts. But even then, the Constitution specifies that only Congress can authorize the making of such appointments. For these inferior officers, only Congress can create their offices, and also specify who appoints them. And such officers are still answerable to Congress. They are subject to subpoena to testify before Congress, and Congress holds the power of the purse by making annual appropriations for their division or program.
Aug 2006
Valley of the Sun
Byrd doesn't care about the Constitution, he's full of shit.

He's still pissed that his party picked a negro to run for president. That'll ruffle the feathers of any racist.
Jan 2007
I think the last few months have been a clear indication on what this president really stands for. Most of what he appears to stand for is not what he campaigned for. It will be interesting to watch when liberals actually figure it out, sooner or later the fogs got to clear...