Page 46 of 80 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 796

Thread: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

  1. #451
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,887

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    "by advise & consent of the Senate", doesn't mean you can refuse every single nominee because you don't like the new agency.

    they are abusing their power, and Obama played a better hand.
    I does mean that they can refuse to consent for any reason they feel like.

    I don't know why they even bother asking questions, because if "intent" becomes part of the law, then its your word against mine. What's the difference between the record of objecting being "Richard Cordrey is an asshole" and "Richard Cordrey abuses any power given him" and "Richard Cordrey is a good bowler, therefore he can't run this bureau"?

    There is no difference, an objection is an objection. And if you and 40 of your other friends can come up with one, then there is no consent.
    Last edited by Samhain; 01-06-12 at 12:50 PM.

  2. #452
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The greatest city on Earth
    Last Seen
    08-04-12 @ 04:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    31,089

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    I does mean that they can refuse to consent for any reason they feel like....
    disagreeing with the agency itself, is an inappropriate reason to refuse to consent to any possible nominee.

    they are abusing their power.

  3. #453
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,887

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    disagreeing with the agency itself, is an inappropriate reason to refuse to consent to any possible nominee.

    they are abusing their power.
    Does it make it better if their objection is that "<insert current nominee> is not worthy of the unchecked power of the CFPB"?

    Now they're objecting the nominee, which makes it ok?

    Again, your opinion of the process is that the intent of the objection matters. I disagree.

  4. #454
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The greatest city on Earth
    Last Seen
    08-04-12 @ 04:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    31,089

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Samhain View Post
    Does it make it better if their objection is that "<insert current nominee> is not worthy of the unchecked power of the CFPB"?

    Now they're objecting the nominee, which makes it ok?

    Again, your opinion of the process is that the intent of the objection matters. I disagree.
    if you are going to filibuster a nominee, you should then allow the POTUS to make a recess appointment when Congress is on vacation.

  5. #455
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

    Quote Originally Posted by Cole View Post
    "In May, 44 of the 47 Senate Republicans, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), sent a letter to Obama vowing to block any nominee to serve as director of the CFPB absent key changes, including eliminating the director's position in favor of a board and forcing the agency to be dependent on Congressionally appropriated funds for its operating budget."
    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    That is basically just a long winded way to say they want to kill it. A department that is answerable to Congress can't take on corporations. Given the amount of control corporations have over the entire political process, you would ideally want it to be as independent as humanly possible from the political process.
    Quote Originally Posted by TomFitz View Post
    The Republicans were trying to kill the agency. They wanted a series of changes to the legislation that would have made it so weak, that every banker, businessman or con man with a friend in the US Chamber of Commerce could go to their congressmen and get anything the agency tried to do reversed.

    The wanted an agency that would be vulnurable to congressional and lobbyist pressure. Remember that this same group of Republicans are busy trying to undo what little finacial reform has taken place since the crash too.

    The Republicans wanted no agency at all, but short of that, they would take one they could bully and emasculate (and spend the next 30 years proposing to do away with).
    Ladies and gentleman, I present to you the truth of the matter. But again, you don't have to take my word for it nor that of the above posters. Just read the book, "The Big Con," by Jonathan Chait or "White Protestant Nation," by Allan J. Lichtman to learn how the Republican party now has K Street lobbyist on lock and how lobbying has corrupted DC politics! But to the point of the appointment over the apparent objection of the Senate, they don't have to like the Bureau itself. Remember: Congress doesn't consist of Republicans alone. Moreover, Congress passed Dodd-Frank; doesn't matter if one side of the political divide disagrees with some or all of the provisions of the legislation that is now law. Congress has an obligation to fill all vacancies under the law they themselves agreed to. It does not matter if the vote went the way of the majority party (Democrats in this case). The bill passed and it is not law.

    Clearly, there is a conserted effort by the GOP not to fill the CFPB position and their reasons are obvious: Wealth and Power.

    By allowing the CFPB Commission vacancy to be filled, the GOP reliquishes control over the Bureau as it is a 1-man show and there is no board that Congress appoints. The GOP sees this as akin to all other Administrative positions where there is only a Secretary and no board responsible to Congress by appointment or otherwise. There's also the issue of this Bureau singularly declaring certain practises by the free market system as being unfair to consumers be it in banking, housing, auto sells, telecommunications or any other industry that sells a product or service where the markets can take advantage of consumers. Republicans want no part of that because it kills their lobbyist interest.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 01-06-12 at 01:16 PM.

  6. #456
    pawn in the game of life
    pragmatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 05:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,984

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by TomFitz View Post
    You're correct in that the Democrats used the 3 day gavel process on one occassion. That being the nomination of John Bolton to be UN ambassador. Bush gave Bolton a recess appointment and Bolton proceeded to live right down to everyone's worst expectations.

    I won't argue that Obama is constitutionally correct on this. I suspect he knows as much about that as any of his advisors and critics. But he'll win the optics. Because the GOP will be forced to go to court to block a nominee and stymie the operation of an agency the public overwhelmingly supports.

    Only in your partisan mind. Bolton did fine...


    “Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.”

  7. #457
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    which law?

    Oh, I am truly sorry...Silly me thinking that the Constitution of the United States was the law of the land.


    the proper way to fix an agency that you feel is poorly constructed, is to pass a new law fixing it.

    Absolutely, however there are serious problems with this agency that Obama and his gang constructed. The very idea that he can create an agency that is neither funded, nor accountable to congress, or the people should make every American who loves this country shudder with the possibilities of what can happen.

    filibustering EVERY nominee to head the agency, is an abuse of the filibuster & Senate approval process.

    Not saying it's right, it sure was good enough for the demo's to use, now all of the sudden, when used against them it is not fair....Surely you see the blatant hypocrisy there?

    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #458
    Educator

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kingdom of Nigh
    Last Seen
    10-13-17 @ 11:25 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,152

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I agree that the Dems did the same sort of thing under Bush, but the Republicans, as per usual, have taken it to a new level. In fact Bush should have done in '08 what Obama did yesterday. The fact that he didn't has caused major problems with over 500 NLRB decisions having been declared invalid because they were made when the board had too few members to form a quorum.
    Of course...they took it to a new level. Let me see here.....

    Dems held up Bush judicial appointments by refusing to pass through committee judges that had the votes to pass confirmation because they didnt agree with them

    Repubs wont pass (like they have the votes to stop it anyway) an appointee to a not yet existent department...not that one was ever nominated mind you. Might be different if the department was already created and the position was of vital importance and there has been someone already nominated for some time and they refused to hold hearings for confirmation. But to blame the other side for stonewalling a confirmation when no one was ever nominated?

    Looks like the same thing to me...a pissing contest. Two little kids holding their breath on the playground trying to get their own way. Obama is the sneaky little one who, while all attention is on the two kids holding their breath, does something wrong hoping not to get caught because of the distraction.

    The "He did it first" excuse is lame at best. Its nothing more than an excuse to do as you please.
    Know the truth and the truth will make you mad, because the truth has no agenda.

  9. #459
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    By allowing the CFPB Commission vacancy to be filled, the GOP reliquishes control over the Bureau as it is a 1-man show and there is no board that Congress appoints. The GOP sees this as akin to all other Administrative positions where there is only a Secretary and no board responsible to Congress by appointment or otherwise. There's also the issue of this Bureau singularly declaring certain practises by the free market system as being unfair to consumers be it in banking, housing, auto sells, telecommunications or any other industry that sells a product or service where the markets can take advantage of consumers. Republicans want no part of that because it kills their lobbyist interest.
    From the book, "The Big Con," by Jonathan Chait, pages 72-73:

    Normally spending is supposed to be carried out through federal agencies, which try to allocate programs on the basis of need and effectiveness. Pork barrel spending circumvents this process altogether, allowing congressmen to allocate money directly without study or review. [Former Congressman] Joe Knollenberg, a Republican on the [House] Appropriations Committee, which sits at the epicenter of the port explosion, summed up the new ethos: "We say that we know better than federal officials and bureaucrats...where to spend money."*

    This disdain for expertise creates a power vacuum in matters of policy, and into this void has flowed a stream of lobbyists. It has been a golden age for K Street.

    ...

    One of the consistent tasks of the Republican agenda over the last decade has been to nurture the K Street machine. Every new subsidy directed to to the business lobby creates a new sector of the economy dependent in some way on its relationship with Washington.
    *Quote source: Washington Post article, "Still Longrolling for Pork," by Robert Novak, June 19, 2006 (article no longer available for free at WashingtonPost.com)

    Blocking the appointment of a CFPB Commissioner feds into this anti-K Street battle between the White House and Republicans who would prefer things remain unchecked where consumer protection is concerned.

  10. #460
    Educator

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kingdom of Nigh
    Last Seen
    10-13-17 @ 11:25 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,152

    Re: Obama Defies Congress With ‘Recess’ Picks. Could Provoke Constitutional Fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
    Do any GOPers here believe that they were right to refuse to appoint any nominee to this new agency?
    They couldnt refuse to appoint anyone, no one was ever nominated for the position
    Know the truth and the truth will make you mad, because the truth has no agenda.

Page 46 of 80 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •