The Czars

Blah

Former Staff
Jan 2007
24,853
3,657
USA
#1
Sen. Byrd questions the Constitutionality of White House "czars"



Quite a bit of discussion has been generated over President Obama'sfondness for "czars," officials working for the White House who are incharge of a special government project -- automotive industry reform,energy policy, environmental and climate change policies, the War onDrugs, the Census, etc.Unfortunately "czars" are essentially unaccountable. Unlike cabinetappointments, "czars" are not vetted by Congress, nor does Congresshave any oversight with regard to projects that are developed andmanaged by the "czars."



Despite his questionable past, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) has remaineda staunch defender of the Constitution and its stated separation ofgovernment powers. Yesterday, in a rare move that was deeply criticalof a President from his own party, Sen. Byrd sent a letter of concern to President Obama:


Sen. Byrd (D)

As presidential assistants and advisers, these White House staffers arenot accountable for their actions to the Congress, to cabinetofficials, and to virtually anyone but the president," Byrd wrote."They rarely testify before congressional committees, and often shieldthe information and decision-making process behind the assertion ofexecutive privilege. In too many instances, White House staff have beenallowed to inhibit openness and transparency, and reduceaccountability."The West Virginia Democrat on Wednesday asked Obama to "considerthe following: that assertions of executive privilege will be made onlyby the president, or with the president's specific approval; thatsenior White House personnel will be limited from exercising authorityover any person, any program, and any funding within the statutoryresponsibility of a Senate-confirmed department or agency head; thatthe president will be responsible for resolving any disagreementbetween a Senate-confirmed agency or department head and White Housestaff; and that the lines of authority and responsibility in theadministration will be transparent and open to the American public.


The Bush administration was fond of expanding executive power and Obama seems to fully embrace that

idea.



Bush appointed several of these mini executives at his discretion and Obama has appointed thirty.
 
Jan 2008
32,903
9,708
Vertiform City
#2
Wow, that IS interesting.



What do you think we're seeing here? Is this Democratic Party infighting? Or...



Is this a Senator who's suddenly getting concerned in his old age?
 
Jan 2008
32,903
9,708
Vertiform City
#4
[quote name='Blueneck' date='15 August 2009 - 08:09 AM' timestamp='1250338158' post='5492']

I respect robert Byrd very much, although he's getting a little old and should probably retire. But I hope he hangs in there for the vote on health care legislation. Here's his voting record on public health issues:



http://www.ontheissues.org/social/Robert_Byrd_Health_Care.htm

[/quote]



Voted yes on blocking Medical Savings Accounts? :eyebrow:



The rest of it looks good though...
 
#6
Before I make my point, I'm not a fan of Bush. In addition, I'm not a fan of Obama. People think appointing Czars is a good thing, a tool which can cut through the bullshit and solves problems. But giving someone the power to bypass it all and answer to only the president is a terrible idea. Especially when some of the Czars are outspoken proponents of eugenics, and forced sterilization.
 

Blah

Former Staff
Jan 2007
24,853
3,657
USA
#7
[quote name='Tino78613' date='16 August 2009 - 12:37 AM' timestamp='1250408263' post='5858']

People think appointing Czars is a good thing, a tool which can cut through the bullshit and solves problems.[/quote]



In other words a way to circumvent the Constitutional checks and balances of government.
 

Similar Discussions