• 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.

Thunder said:
sorry, but Article 1 Section 5 is rules for Congress, not for the President.

either way, did 51 Senators show up for work on January 4th?

no? then they were unable to vote on any laws.

if you don't have a quorum, then you cannot conduct business, and you are not really in session.
Click to expand...

If it were a Republican president involved, the critics would be saying this over and over.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

misterman said:
How does any of what you posted contradict what I said?

Just because a few congressmen think there isn't enough accountability doesn't mean there isn't.

How about you? Do you think every single government agency and department should be run by a board? We should have five Secretaries of Defense?
Click to expand...

I did not know that Defense was a watchdog department ... who knew !!!!
 
misterman said:
If it were a Republican president involved, the critics would be saying this over and over.
Click to expand...

well, I can only speak for myself, and I think what Obama did was fair...considering the context of GOP obstructionism.

if a Republican POTUS was faced with similar shenanigans, I would support a similar move.
 
misterman said:
If it were a Republican president involved, the critics would be saying this over and over.
Click to expand...

When it was a Republican President involved, and to appoint someone who was not a Judge, but rather into the Attorney General's Office, Bush honored the Constitution, and did not pull an Obama. You do not have to imply hypocrisy. You have actual results that show that you are ill-informed in your opinion.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
When it was a Republican President involved, and to appoint someone who was not a Judge, but rather into the Attorney General's Office, Bush honored the Constitution,....
Click to expand...

that may have been the first & last time, King George honored any federal law.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Eighty Deuce said:
I did not know that Defense was a watchdog department ... who knew !!!!
Click to expand...

So now you've moved the goalpost to say only "watchdog" departments need more accountability? Why?
 
Eighty Deuce said:
When it was a Republican President involved, and to appoint someone who was not a Judge, but rather into the Attorney General's Office, Bush honored the Constitution, and did not pull an Obama. You do not have to imply hypocrisy. You have actual results that show that you are ill-informed in your opinion.
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying that if Bush had done a recess appointment like Obama did, you'd see many conservatives supporting him instead of bashing him like they're doing with Obama.
 
Thunder said:
well, I can only speak for myself, and I think what Obama did was fair...considering the context of GOP obstructionism.

if a Republican POTUS was faced with similar shenanigans, I would support a similar move.
Click to expand...

Right. So you're consistent and non-partisan. I commend you for that.
 
misterman said:
Right. So you're consistent and non-partisan. I commend you for that.
Click to expand...

I believe in democracy. And if you don't have enough votes to kill an agency, then work on getting more votes. Don't play games with filibusters and perpetual pro forma sessions to keep the inevitable from taking place.

obstructionism in the face of majority rule, is wrong.
 
Thunder said:
I believe in democracy. And if you don't have enough votes to kill an agency, then work on getting more votes. Don't play games with filibusters and perpetual pro forma sessions to keep the inevitable from taking place.

obstructionism in the face of majority rule, is wrong.
Click to expand...

I agree, up to a point. I do agree that the pro forma session thing, and alot of the way the Senate works, is in obstructionism territory.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

misterman said:
So now you've moved the goalpost to say only "watchdog" departments need more accountability? Why?
Click to expand...

No, I said they need more oversite. As "watchdogs" they now exercise authority over entities other than themselves. Not so Defense. That is power. This new Department was invested with enormous power, lack of oversight, and lack of the usual Congressional controls.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Eighty Deuce said:
No, I said they need more oversite. As "watchdogs" they now exercise authority over entities other than themselves. Not so Defense. That is power. This new Department was invested with enormous power, lack of oversight, and lack of the usual Congressional controls.
Click to expand...

But how does having a board run it provide more oversight? If Congress wants to oversee it more, it can hold oversight hearings, etc. like it does with all other agencies. Maybe the appropriations thing is valid, but not a board.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

misterman said:
But how does having a board run it provide more oversight? If Congress wants to oversee it more, it can hold oversight hearings, etc. like it does with all other agencies. Maybe the appropriations thing is valid, but not a board.
Click to expand...

Pehaps you need to consider if you are given authority and a budget to investigate others. Is there a difference in the decision making if just you decide, or if 5 of you have to discuss, and then decide ? Is more eyes and input a halmark of greater oversite ? Are you just as able to abuse your power with a Board as when it was just you ?
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Eighty Deuce said:
Pehaps you need to consider if you are given authority and a budget to investigate others. Is there a difference in the decision making if just you decide, or if 5 of you have to discuss, and then decide ? Is more eyes and input a halmark of greater oversite ? Are you just as able to abuse your power with a Board as when it was just you ?
Click to expand...

Oversight and not abusing power are two different things. Oversight means Congress overseeing so power isn't abused. A board doesn't give Congress more oversight.

As for abuse of power prevented by a board, I ask again - do you think all agencies should be run by boards?

There are plenty of ways we prevent abuse of power, even by agencies run by single people. They must follow all kinds of rules designed to prevent that.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Eighty Deuce said:
Pehaps you need to consider if you are given authority and a budget to investigate others. Is there a difference in the decision making if just you decide, or if 5 of you have to discuss, and then decide ? Is more eyes and input a halmark of greater oversite ? Are you just as able to abuse your power with a Board as when it was just you ?
Click to expand...

Again, WTF are you talking about? What about Treasury, Justice, and the EEOC, for example.? These are agencies headed up by one individual, and they have investigative powers.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

misterman said:
Oversight and not abusing power are two different things. Oversight means Congress overseeing so power isn't abused. A board doesn't give Congress more oversight.

As for abuse of power prevented by a board, I ask again - do you think all agencies should be run by boards?

There are plenty of ways we prevent abuse of power, even by agencies run by single people. They must follow all kinds of rules designed to prevent that.
Click to expand...

You've been answered. You just don't like the answer. Rules do not mean squat unless there are enough folks looking, and with enforcement ability, to be sure they are followed.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

AdamT said:
Again, WTF are you talking about? What about Treasury, Justice, and the EEOC, for example.? These are agencies headed up by one individual, and they have investigative powers.
Click to expand...

True, except for the EEOC, which is of course a "commission" meaning it has several members that vote.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

AdamT said:
Again, WTF are you talking about? What about Treasury, Justice, and the EEOC, for example.? These are agencies headed up by one individual, and they have investigative powers.
Click to expand...

Which of those are funded by the Federal Reserve ? Up to 12% of the budget of the Federal Reserve ?
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Eighty Deuce said:
You've been answered. You just don't like the answer. Rules do not mean squat unless there are enough folks looking, and with enforcement ability, to be sure they are followed.
Click to expand...

No, you didn't answer adequately. If you can't, just say so.

Plenty of agencies with plenty of power are run by single people and work just fine.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Eighty Deuce said:
Which of those are funded by the Federal Reserve ? Up to 12% of the budget of the Federal Reserve ?
Click to expand...

The issue of funding is separate from the issue of having a board. If you want to change the funding of this agency to direct appropriations, say so.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Isn't it ironic we are discussing BO's unconstuitutional move to appoint an illegal agency head to an agency this is also unconstitutional.

As Dodd-Frank Exposed has noted before, CFPB might be the least accountable creation of Congress in history. To review, briefly:
•CFPB will be run by a director not a board or a commission as are agencies with similar responsibilities and authority.
•The eventual director will be confirmed for a five-year term placing him or her effectively outside the presidential election cycle.
•The director does not serve “at the pleasure of the President” as do all other political appointees but may not be removed from office by the President only for cause.
•CFPB’s budget is not appropriated by Congress and therefore the relevant committees have no budget oversight of the agency.
•It’s budget is set and controlled exclusively by the director to be 10 percent of the of “the combined earnings of the Federal Reserve System.”
•The federal courts are strictly forbidden to review CFPB’s rules.
•The only body that can overturn the agency’s rules is the Financial Stability Oversight Council of whose 10 members two-thirds must vote to do so. By the way, CFPB’s director sits on the council.
Click to expand...

When President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act on July 21, he also created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), and along with it, perhaps the most powerful agency head in the history of the American bureaucracy.

According to one financial expert, who wanted to remain unnamed, the amount of power the director of the CFPB would assume is “so significant it may be unconstitutional.”

Appointed by the president and approved by the Senate for five-year terms, the director of the CFPB will have almost unlimited authority to regulate consumer issues and call the shots for banks and other lending firms.

To top it off, the director will only be supervised by two boards- the Consumer Financial Protection Oversight Board and the Consumer Advisory Board. Both will comprise of members appointed by none other than the director.

“I am not familiar with an institution that gives so much power to one person,” Todd Zywicki, law professor at George Mason University, told The Daily Caller. “The idea that this position is unconstitutional is exactly correct.”
Click to expand...
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

misterman said:
The issue of funding is separate from the issue of having a board. If you want to change the funding of this agency to direct appropriations, say so.
Click to expand...

It was in the original note from McConnell to Obama. It has been cited already. You are late to the discussion.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

Eighty Deuce said:
It was in the original note from McConnell to Obama. It has been cited already. You are late to the discussion.
Click to expand...

I know. I'm asking you why you think a board = oversight. Oversight means congressional control. A board doesn't accomplish that, though the funding issue might.
 
Re: Obama defies Congress with ‘recess’ picks

misterman said:
The issue of funding is separate from the issue of having a board. If you want to change the funding of this agency to direct appropriations, say so.
Click to expand...

Those are only two items on a list of concerns that the GOP cited to the WH. This issue really isn't the simplistic black/white event some on the Left are trying to portray. (and some on the Right for that matter)

Lots of politics on both sides of the aisle. This new agency will have a notable amount of power unchecked by Congress. One party is promoting it, one party is trying to throttle it back. Basic Washington sausage making.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom