• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Huntsville, AL, eh? :roll:
Yes. Huntsville. It used to be one of the smartest towns in the US with more masters and Ph.Ds per capita than any other city. But that has all changed with the destruction of NASA and the elimination of a great many defense contracts intended to prevent the loss of future wars, including nuclear wars.

Now Washington DC with it plague of lawyers is the smartest (but not in quite the same way).

If you want to solve problems you bring them to Huntsville where the engineers are. If you want to create problems you take them to Washington DC where the lawyers are.
 
Last edited:
There was no pro-forma session in the Senate the day Obama made those appointments, which means they were in recess.

Correct. Republicans took every possible liberty with the rules to prevent Obama from filling these positions which effectively forced Obama to resort to the same tactics.
 
The Senate has followed the proper protocols. Protocols that Obama's own Justice Department argued for. These protocols compel a President to act with the advice and consent of Congress. Such advice and consent Obama has shunned. Now Obama has taken a further unprecedented step to take power from the Legislative. The community organizer needs to be shown the door.

Spare us your disingenuous-ness..... unless, of course, you can document your equivalent outrage over the John Bolton's appointment to the UN, which was also a recess appointment. Sorry, but the Republican's played games with this appointment and Obama has joined into that game with his move.
 
Spare us your disingenuous-ness..... unless, of course, you can document your equivalent outrage over the John Bolton's appointment to the UN, which was also a recess appointment. Sorry, but the Republican's played games with this appointment and Obama has joined into that game with his move.

I don't think that you quite understand what the outrage is about. It doesn't have to do with Obama using his ability to appoint someone during a congresional recess. It was the fact that despite the fact that Obama defended the rule that Presidents must wait 3 days before appointing someone into an office against Bush and despite the fact that Obama's own lawyers said that the 3-day rule was completely constitutional and Obama agreed with them in 2010, Obama went and broke that rule.
 
I don't think that you quite understand what the outrage is about. It doesn't have to do with Obama using his ability to appoint someone during a congresional recess. It was the fact that despite the fact that Obama defended the rule that Presidents must wait 3 days before appointing someone into an office against Bush and despite the fact that Obama's own lawyers said that the 3-day rule was completely constitutional and Obama agreed with them in 2010, Obama went and broke that rule.

He would have been quite happy to wait three days if Republicans weren't gaming the recess process. But they were so he had the choice of breaking the rule, or allowing Republicans to subvert the implementation of major legislation that they passed and he signed into law. It's beyond ridiculous to complain about it. It's like forcing a car off a road and complaining because the other car drove on the sidewalk.
 
I don't think that you quite understand what the outrage is about. It doesn't have to do with Obama using his ability to appoint someone during a congresional recess. It was the fact that despite the fact that Obama defended the rule that Presidents must wait 3 days before appointing someone into an office against Bush and despite the fact that Obama's own lawyers said that the 3-day rule was completely constitutional and Obama agreed with them in 2010, Obama went and broke that rule.

That is not the least bit true. The original intent of pro forma sessions was to satisfy a constitutional requirement that one chamber of Congress could not adjourn for more than 3 days without consent of the other chamber. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that this also applies to the president.

A pro-forma session counts only as one day's business. If a pro-forma session is not held on a day, the chamber, in this case, the Senate, is considered adjourned, and not in business, which gives the president the power to use a recess appointment. Bush understood that well when he appointed John Bolton. Democrats cried foul, but there was nothing legally that could be done. This time, it is Republicans who are whining, and just as in the case of Bolton, they can piss and moan all they want to, but there is nothing legally they can do.

In short, Republicans have reaped what they sowed.
 
Last edited:
The law itself, creating this position, specifically said that the candidate must be confirmed by the Senate.

However, one question a judge could need to answer is whether Cordray will actually be able to assume those powers since he has been recess-appointed. The text of the Dodd-Frank law states that those powers will not take effect until the CFPB director "is confirmed by the Senate."

Court fight over recess appointments 'almost certain,' Chamber says - TheHill.com

Obama. Anything to try to make something as politicized as he can. What a jackass.
 
That is not the least bit true. The original intent of pro forma sessions was to satisfy a constitutional requirement that one chamber of Congress could not adjourn for more than 3 days without consent of the other chamber. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that this also applies to the president.

A pro-forma session counts only as one day's business. If a pro-forma session is not held on a day, the chamber, in this case, the Senate, is considered adjourned, and not in business, which gives the president the power to use a recess appointment. Bush understood that well when he appointed John Bolton. Democrats cried foul, but there was nothing legally that could be done. This time, it is Republicans who are whining, and just as in the case of Bolton, they can piss and moan all they want to, but there is nothing legally they can do.

In short, Republicans have reaped what they sowed.

Not according to the Obama Administration ....... oooooops !

It turns out that the action not only contradicts long-standing practice, but also the view of the administration itself. In 2010, Deputy Solicitor General Neal Katyal explained to the Supreme Court the Obama administration’s view that recess appointments are only permissible when Congress is in recess for more than three days. Here’s the exchange with Chief Justice John Roberts:


CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: And the recess appointment power doesn't work why?

MR. KATYAL: The -- the recess appointment power can work in -- in a recess. I think our office has opined the recess has to be longer than 3 days. And -- and so, it is potentially available to avert the future crisis that -- that could -- that could take place with respect to the board. If there are no other questions –

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Thank you, counsel.
Unprecedented

The "3 day rule" was part of the established checks-and-balances. But as Obama is so inept politically, he resorts to such as the Kornhusker Kickback, Florida Flim-Flam, Louisiana Purchase .............. and we have the much maligned and unwanted Obamacare. How's that joint-session "pass this JOBS bill" going ? This guy can't even hold a candle to Bill Clinton's dick.
 
Spare us your disingenuous-ness..... unless, of course, you can document your equivalent outrage over the John Bolton's appointment to the UN, which was also a recess appointment. Sorry, but the Republican's played games with this appointment and Obama has joined into that game with his move.

Spare me your being ignorant as to process. Bolton was not appointed in contradiction to standard recess protocols.
 
funny, did Obama break any laws by doing this?

no, no he has not.
This is a weasel response. The precedents are clearly against Obama, in fact the Dem Senators supporting this move are reversing their own course which they took when Bush was President. This precedent of using proforma sessions to cancel the recess appointment option existed even under Clinton as well. Obama supported this very precedent while in the Senate. He's is a hypocrite and so is Harry Reid.
 
Bush makes recess appointments, no problem. Obama makes recess appointments, it's a constitutional crisis. For gods sake people, whether something is right or wrong is not determined by who did it.

Yes the right is utterly hypocritical. Not to mention, this recess appointment would not be needed if the Congress aka the GOP actually did their jobs instead of constantly blocking appointments. Obama is 3 years into his term, and he still has not gotten all his appointments approved from the first year.... in fact I believe he is the president in recent history to have least amount of appointments approved by congress, and all due to GOP cockblocking.
 
Bush makes recess appointments, no problem. Obama makes recess appointments, it's a constitutional crisis. For gods sake people, whether something is right or wrong is not determined by who did it.

Bush made 182 recess appointments.There was no whining from Republicans then. Obama has made 28.


McConnell publicly stated his job was to make Obama a One term President. The gimmick of holding a few seconds opening and closing back fired! Now we can start protecting people from the greed!

Obama also made 3 appointments to the NLRB. Good for him!
 
Last edited:
Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Obama defies Congress with 'recess' picks - Washington Times

Pushing the limits of his recess appointment powers, President Obama on Wednesday bypassed the Senate to install three members of the National Labor Relations Board and a director for the controversial new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau - moves Republicans said amounted to unconstitutional power grabs.

Mr. Obama said the appointments, which he previewed during a campaign-style speech in Ohio, were necessary because Senate Republicans have blocked him at every turn. But in making the move, he rejected three precedents, including two in which he played a part, that would have blocked the appointments.

“I refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer,” Mr. Obama said in Shaker Heights, drawing applause from his audience. “When Congress refuses to act and as a result hurts our economy and puts our people at risk, then I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them.”

Now I have a problem with recess appointments regardless of who is President. Unless it is a National emergency (I.e. the Sec. of Defense dies while Congress is in Recess) that no one should be appointed without Congressional approval if Congressional approval is required.

To me what makes this worse is that Congress (Senate) was NOT in recess when Pres. B.O. made these appointments.

Its just another example of a power grab and a disregard for the Constitutional process'.

Seems to me that we, the people, need to do some serious house cleaning this November. All of the House, 1/3 of the Senate and the President is up for re-election this November.
Either we can sit here and complain about the "same ole, same ole" point fingers and play the blame game or we can do something about it and get rid of each and every one of them.
 
Yes the right is utterly hypocritical. Not to mention, this recess appointment would not be needed if the Congress aka the GOP actually did their jobs instead of constantly blocking appointments. Obama is 3 years into his term, and he still has not gotten all his appointments approved from the first year.... in fact I believe he is the president in recent history to have least amount of appointments approved by congress, and all due to GOP cockblocking.

Do you realize that Obama had 60 Democrats in the Senate in his first two years ? LOL ......... if he didn't get an appointment then, it was Dems blocking .... sheeeesh ;)
 
Bush made 182 recess appointments.There was no whining from Republicans then. Obama has made 28.


McConnell publicly stated his job was to make Obama a One term President. The gimmick of holding a few seconds opening and closing back fired! Now we can start protecting people from the greed!

Obama also made 3 appointments to the NLRB. Good for him!

Same to you. Obama had a super majority in the Senate for his first two years. You get your appointments that way. You also get fiasco's like Obamacare. ;)
 
Same to you. Obama had a super majority in the Senate for his first two years. You get your appointments that way. You also get fiasco's like Obamacare. ;)

And the Republicans have not given any good reason to block the appointments. The only reason they don't want the appointments is that they were done by Obama. Sorry, that is not good enough reason.

Also, yes, I am aware the Dems use this tactic as well and that is wrong too. When the Dems used tactics like the GOP is doing now, the conservatives called the Dems "Obstructionists". So where is the conservatievs cry of obstructionists against the GOP now? All we hear are crickets. F***ing hypocrits the conservatives are.

We may have a partisan government, but we should not have a dysfunctional one.
 
Last edited:
Hey, if the President wants to say that anytime the doors are closed in the Senate that they are in recess, take it.

For clarification, how many of the Bush recess appointments were made while the Senate was in pro-forma sessions?

Don't worry, I already know the answer, its 0. The shortest recess during which a presidential appointment has been made in the past 20 years was 10 days, according to CRS.

Here is a nice summary of what the issue is

What is a recess appointment? - The Federal Eye - The Washington Post
 
And the Republicans have not given any good reason to block the appointments. The only reason they don't want the appointments is that they were done by Obama. Sorry, that is not good enough reason.

Also, yes, I am aware the Dems use this tactic as well and that is wrong too. When the Dems used tactics like the GOP is doing now, the conservatives called the Dems "Obstructionists". So where is the conservatievs cry of obstructionists against the GOP now? All we hear are crickets. F***ing hypocrits the conservatives are.

We may have a partisan government, but we should not have a dysfunctional one.

The GOP doesn't want the appointment because they feel, as I do, that the CFPB is a duplication of already existing functions of the federal government, most notably the FTC and SEC.
 
And the Republicans have not given any good reason to block the appointments. The only reason they don't want the appointments is that they were done by Obama. Sorry, that is not good enough reason.

Also, yes, I am aware the Dems use this tactic as well and that is wrong too. When the Dems used tactics like the GOP is doing now, the conservatives called the Dems "Obstructionists". So where is the conservatievs cry of obstructionists against the GOP now? All we hear are crickets. F***ing hypocrits the conservatives are.

We may have a partisan government, but we should not have a dysfunctional one.

Sorry, but this is just plain uninformed. The Senate has a Constitutional role to "advise and consent". That means that the President has to work with them, like it or not. Recess appointments were originally because the Senators would be gone for months, commuting by horseback, out of direct communications except by mail which took weeks. They were legitimate appointments. It is the Executive which abused the system over the years, not the Senate. Now the Executive has taken it even further.

If you would research, you would see that the Senate GOP laid out their issues on this appointment long ago. You can also easily research it. It is you who are misinformed.
 
The GOP doesn't want the appointment because they feel, as I do, that the CFPB is a duplication of already existing functions of the federal government, most notably the FTC and SEC.

And again, that isn't a good enough reason. If they don't like it, wait till they are elected and abolish it then. However, this little temper tantrum the GOP is throwing is proving disfunctionality on a whole new level.

It looks like Obama found a way around that. I don't agree with it, but then I don't agree with the GOP blocking just because they don't like it.
 
The shortest recess during which a presidential appointment has been made in the past 20 years was 10 days, according to CRS.

Here is a nice summary of what the issue is

What is a recess appointment? - The Federal Eye - The Washington Post

Funny, the justification and definition of "recess" the WH is using to justify this basically opens up the possibility for recess appointments on any weekend of the year. Basically, the WH is saying that since there isn't anyone there, they're on recess. The Senate is empty on most weekends. This has potential to set a pretty dangerous precedent if allowed to stand which it likely won't. Pretty much unconstitutional.
 
And again, that isn't a good enough reason. If they don't like it, wait till they are elected and abolish it then. However, this little temper tantrum the GOP is throwing is proving disfunctionality on a whole new level.

It looks like Obama found a way around that. I don't agree with it, but then I don't agree with the GOP blocking just because they don't like it.

Again, if you go and look at the original intent of Recess Appointments, as construed by the Founders, they make sense. It is the Executive, through the decades, that abused such to get around the Constitutional function of the Senate to block any appointment it chooses. It is the Executive that bastardized the process. However, the Legislative retained one option to prevent such abuse by the Executive, again as per the letter of the law.

Now Obama has just disregarded such. Done what NO PRESIDENT IN HISTORY HAS EVER DONE BEFORE. See the link in the prior post.

Its amazing with the libs. Its OK to break the rules when your guy is the one doing it. W never did it. Clinton never did it. Neither Elder Bush, Reagan, etc.
 
Funny, the justification and definition of "recess" the WH is using to justify this basically opens up the possibility for recess appointments on any weekend of the year. Basically, the WH is saying that since there isn't anyone there, they're on recess. The Senate is empty on most weekends. This has potential to set a pretty dangerous precedent if allowed to stand which it likely won't. Pretty much unconstitutional.

That's exactly what I was pointing out. Not only that, when the doors close and they go home for the night, they are on recess.
 
Obama laid out his cards, he's abusing the system, spitting on the system all to score political points for his re-election. "See I HAD to act and now look they are trying to hurt you!" is going to be his stance. It's crass, it's dangerous, for ****s sake we look like a Banana Republic atm with **** like this going on.
 
Back
Top Bottom