• 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.

Yes, that is the point!

The GOP and its Wall Street masters do not want a Consumer Protection Agency, and want to use the GOP congress to gut the agency's powers before it even gets started. The structure of the Consumer Protection Agency is deliberatly modeled on the FTC, in order to prevent the pay to play boys in Congress from interfering with the agency over every issue that K Street is paid to fight.

This is going to court. And since there is no regulation, provision or Constitutional requirement for any waiting period at all for a recess appointment, I expect the plaintiffs to lose.
 
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.

Well, Republicans, if that is true, (which it seems to be) then just what the hell are you going to do about it?? More action...less gum flapping. How many lines in the sand are they going to re-draw??
 
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.


And what rule did Obama break? Show me the letter of the rule he broke and how it was broke. Again, I'm not supporting what Obama did. I don't think it was breaking a rule, but I do think it was a common courtesy that was disrupted.
 
This business of blocking persidential appointments for years on end started with the Gingrich Congress in 1994. It has been a hallmark of every Republican congress since then.

As with the abuse of the filibuster, the flagrant obstructionism gets worse with each cycle. The GOP has repeatedly set new records for filibusters in every session it sits in opposition in, only to break their own record in the next session.

The Federal courts are now littered with backlog because there is no one to try or hear the cases. Federal agencies plod along without management. And the government is funded almost entirely by continuing resolution, making budgeting and planning difficult to impossible.

Republcians like to complain about the inefficiency and waste in government, while doing everything in their power to perpetuate it.

Which is what happens when you take the most routine functions and polticize them.
 
Well, Republicans, if that is true, (which it seems to be) then just what the hell are you going to do about it?? More action...less gum flapping. How many lines in the sand are they going to re-draw??

They have options, but all have political considerations, especially in an election year.

The true risk/damage is in the breakdown of rules that keep the three branches in balance. If the relationship between opposing parties occupying the Executive and Legislative is now to just trash rules, we all will suffer.
 
And what rule did Obama break? Show me the letter of the rule he broke and how it was broke. Again, I'm not supporting what Obama did. I don't think it was breaking a rule, but I do think it was a common courtesy that was disrupted.

Simple, the Senate isn't in recess. They are holding pro-forma sessions every two days. If you have a problem with pro-forma sessions being held, complain to the Majority leader.
 
This business of blocking persidential appointments for years on end started with the Gingrich Congress in 1994. It has been a hallmark of every Republican congress since then.

As with the abuse of the filibuster, the flagrant obstructionism gets worse with each cycle. The GOP has repeatedly set new records for filibusters in every session it sits in opposition in, only to break their own record in the next session.

The Federal courts are now littered with backlog because there is no one to try or hear the cases. Federal agencies plod along without management. And the government is funded almost entirely by continuing resolution, making budgeting and planning difficult to impossible.

Republcians like to complain about the inefficiency and waste in government, while doing everything in their power to perpetuate it.

Which is what happens when you take the most routine functions and polticize them.

The Dems blocked Bush in the same way. In fact, they used the 3-day gavel process on occasion. Look it up.

Try some links next time as well.
 
Sorry that doesn't show the letter of the law or any other information that I requested. Show me the letter of the law and how he broke it.

Showing an opinion piece on interpretations is not proof.

Is the Senate in session when they are having pro-forma sessions, or are they in recess? Is the Senate in recess when the doors are closed for the night or the weekend?

If you believe a "Senate in recess" is defined as anytime the doors are closed on the Senate and someone isn't physically present, then you are right. No law is broken.
 
Obama never follows rules. He thinks they are for everyone else.
 
I would hope that the GOP declares all actions by that Department as unconstitutional, not in accordance with the Law, and directs all US entities to not recognize actions by either agency. This is what happens when one skirts the Constitution. It is one more sign of hugely inept leadership by the inept moron in the WH.

"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."

-Article II, Section 2, U.S. Constitution

STFU already.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Should we start calling him King Barack?
 
Obama never follows rules. He thinks they are for everyone else.

What rule did he break exactly?

If you can't tell us, then you're breaking the rule against saying things that aren't true.
 
Sorry that doesn't show the letter of the law or any other information that I requested. Show me the letter of the law and how he broke it.

Showing an opinion piece on interpretations is not proof.

Constitution good enough?

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."

Now, turnabout's fair play. Kindly link me to proof that the Senate was in recess...and that the vacancies occurred during said recess.

The Senate was either in recess or it was not. The vacancies either occurred while the Senate was in recess or they did not. Pretty straightforward.
 
Last edited:
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.

What rule? Post it. Who wrote it, and by what authority, and who enforces it?
 
When Bush used loopholes and ambiguity of the rules, or broke from tradition, Democrats whined and wailed about it. They did it with Bush doing reconciliation on a primarily budgetary bill, then turned around and attempted to use it on a Health Care Bill. They complained about recess appointments when Bolton got named to the U.N.

Are some Republicans being hypocritical here? To a point yes. So are some Democrats. And if we’re being honest, the two situations are not identical since Obama is not just doing a recess appointment but doing so in a fashion that has largely been unused for over a century and is “ambiguous” at best constitutionally. Bush’s ,by and large to my memory, were standard style recess appointments but simply of people who were undergoing strict scrutiny just prior to the recess with little chance of being confirmed.

What I will say is this…in a year or five, if the Republicans win back the White House, my sympathy for democrats if Republicans start using the same stretches and ambiguity as they have been threatening and actually doing with regards to this kind of stuff will be nil. I won’t support the Republicans doing it, but I’ll have no sympathy for Democrats who supported pushing the boundary further then said action comes back to haunt them.
 
On the what's a recess issue, The Hill's article says it all:

In 2004, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the president has power to make recess appointments and did not set a minimum length of recess for such appointments to be valid.

“The Constitution, on its face, does not establish a minimum time that an authorized break in the Senate must last to give legal force to the President’s appointment power under the Recess Appointments Clause. And we do not set the limit today,” the court ruled in Evans v. Stephens.


Victor K. Williams, a clinical assistant professor at Catholic University of America School of Law, said Obama could make a recess appointment in a break as short as two days. The Senate’s next pro-forma session is scheduled for Friday, Jan. 6 at 11:00 am.


Williams said Obama could argue the chamber is not meeting as a deliberative body and effectively is in the midst of a five-week recess.
“If the Senate is not sitting as a deliberative body ready and willing to render advisory consent, it triggers recess-appointment authority,” he said. “The pro-forma sessions are obviously shams and the Senate is taking a five-week recess.”


Some liberal advocates urged Obama to appoint Cordray during the intersession recess consisting of the few minutes that elapsed Tuesday between the end of the first session of the 112th Congress and the start of the second. Former President Theodore Roosevelt had seized such an opportunity more than 100 years ago to recess more than 160 nominees.

Obama under strong pressure to break precedent on recess appointments - TheHill.com
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

The GOP would oppose any & all appointments to this position, cause they are all cranky about the agency being created. With those kinds of games going on, Obama has every right to do what he did.

The democratic way to oppose a new agency, is to vote it out of existence or defund it. But if you don't have the votes to do that, then your **** out of luck.
 
Last edited:
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.

I'm so tired of Conservatives talking about the Constitution while using procedurals methods to bypass it. The Frank Dodd bill was passed via the process laid out int he Constitituion. Now you can change that bill....using methods in the Consitition, my a legislative action. Instead, Conservatives want to use the appoitment process in order to gain changes to a passed bill.

That's not the purpose of the appoitment process.

It's no different than the debt ceiling fiasco. There's something called a budget process...and that's where you make cuts. Not threatening to force the government into default as a bludgeon to get what you want.

So cry moar and quit acting like you care about the constitution unless it's convienent.
 
From an earlier link, and already quoted at least once:

Some liberal advocates urged Obama to appoint Cordray during the intersession recess consisting of the few minutes that elapsed Tuesday between the end of the first session of the 112th Congress and the start of the second. Former President Theodore Roosevelt had seized such an opportunity more than 100 years ago to recess more than 160 nominees.

Had Obama followed the above, it would have been within the rules. However, it only gets Cordray through the end of 2012. By waiting a day, and violating the rules, Cordray now serves until the end of 2013.

We are supposed to be a system of checks and balances libs. What you just got now is a further erosion of such. so that a Republican President can do same, thus denying a hostile minority from its prior Constitutional authority. All of you are in an outrage that teh Senate blocks nominations. WTF are they supposed to do ... pass all of a Presidents appointees ? What kind of system is that ?
 
I'm so tired of Conservatives talking about the Constitution while using procedurals methods to bypass it. The Frank Dodd bill was passed via the process laid out int he Constitituion. Now you can change that bill....using methods in the Consitition, my a legislative action. Instead, Conservatives want to use the appoitment process in order to gain changes to a passed bill.

That's not the purpose of the appoitment process.

It's no different than the debt ceiling fiasco. There's something called a budget process...and that's where you make cuts. Not threatening to force the government into default as a bludgeon to get what you want.

So cry moar and quit acting like you care about the constitution unless it's convienent.

Another logic fail. The procedural methods do not bypass the Constitution. They are there as part of the process intended by the Founders. While the concept of Recess Appointments has certainly taken on power likely not originally intended, so too did the Senate have the power to check such, when it truly wanted to.

Now, by Obama's new definition, the President can make a Recess Appointment on any weekend. Are you happy ?
 
how come no one is complaining about the GOP refusing to allow the appointment of ANYONE to this position, as a way of opposing the new agency?

is this the right & appropriate use of the confirmation process?
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

The GOP would oppose any & all appointments to this position, cause they are all cranky about the agency being created. With those kinds of games going on, Obama has every right to do what he did.

The democratic way to oppose a new agency, is to vote it out of existence or defund it. But if you don't have the votes to do that, then your **** out of luck.

Liberals only care about power grabs when a republican is doing it and vice versa.

This is the government we deserve.
 
Back
Top Bottom