• 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!

Pelosi announces new select committee to oversee coronavirus response

You noticed how the rank and file cons shut up about the Kennedy Center when the mob boss said he liked it?

I don't much care what Trump likes about a particular bit of special pork. I want to know why that particular entity, which by law must have its performances sustained by private funds, got special additional pork - it was already federally funded to cover is operational and maintenance costs as it is every year.

John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts - Wikipedia
 
Republicans will predictably say that oversight is going to distract the White House from effectively overseeing the pandemic response. The logical counterpoint to this is that trump was incompetent during impeachment, he was incompetent after impeachment, and will continue to be incompetent after this new oversight is created.

The only difference is that he’ll be incompetent while Pelosi attempts to create transparency over how our tax dollars are being used to help Americans hurt by the outbreak.

And predictably, trump will fight all subpoenas and any attempts to learn where the money is going.




https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2020/04/02/pelosi-trump-coronavirus-oversight/

The creation of such a committee was part of the legislation.
Why expect the administration to fight oversight? There are no privlege issues involved; no checks and balances conflicts-- Congess appropriated the funds and has a right to see how its spent.
 
The creation of such a committee was part of the legislation.
Why expect the administration to fight oversight? There are no privlege issues involved; no checks and balances conflicts-- Congess appropriated the funds and has a right to see how its spent.

What will you move the goal posts to after he fights oversight?
 
What will you move the goal posts to after he fights oversight?

Depends on its nature. If Congress wants to know whether the president thought about doing something, maybe discussed it with advisors and ultimately didn't take the course of action, one would think resistance would be warranted. After all, at that point we dealing with privlege issues and checks and balances issues.
But otherwise no reason for concern.
 
Depends on its nature. If Congress wants to know whether the president thought about doing something, maybe discussed it with advisors and ultimately didn't take the course of action, one would think resistance would be warranted. After all, at that point we dealing with privlege issues and checks and balances issues.
But otherwise no reason for concern.

Okay, so you you acknowledge that trump will fight oversight. Makes one wonder why you tried wasting my time with the notion that he wouldn’t fight oversight.
 
Real fiscal conservatives will come into this thread and applaud.

Let's count them.
 
Okay, so you you acknowledge that trump will fight oversight. Makes one wonder why you tried wasting my time with the notion that he wouldn’t fight oversight.

No reason for Congress for oversite on something that didn't happen.
It's called checks and balances.
Standard Constitution principles.
 
No reason for Congress for oversite on something that didn't happen.
It's called checks and balances.
Standard Constitution principles.

Uh huh.
 
Okay, so you you acknowledge that trump will fight oversight. Makes one wonder why you tried wasting my time with the notion that he wouldn’t fight oversight.

No reason for Congress for oversite on something that didn't happen.
It's called checks and balances.
Standard Constitution principles.


Statement from the White House on Congressional oversight of the stimulus funds

Relevant parts, using 'legalese' so it might be difficult for some people to comprehend that the president* is claiming rights more akin to those employed by people like Vlad and Xi

. . . a requirement to consult with the Congress regarding executive decision-making, including with respect to the President’s Article II authority to oversee executive branch operations, violates the separation of powers by intruding upon the President’s power and duty to supervise the staffing of the executive branch under Article II, section 1 (vesting the President with the “executive Power”) and Article II, section 3 (instructing the President to “take Care” that the laws are faithfully executed). Accordingly, my Administration will treat this provision as hortatory but not mandatory.

Section 4018 of Division A of the Act establishes a new Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR) within the Department of the Treasury to manage audits and investigations of loans and investments made by the Secretary of the Treasury under the Act. Section 4018(e)(4)(B) of the Act authorizes the SIGPR to request information from other government agencies and requires the SIGPR to report to the Congress “without delay” any refusal of such a request that “in the judgment of the Special Inspector General” is unreasonable. I do not understand, and my Administration will not treat, this provision as permitting the SIGPR to issue reports to the Congress without the presidential supervision required by the Take Care Clause, Article II, section 3.

Certain other provisions (such as sections 20001, 21007, and 21010 of Division B of the Act) purport to condition the authority of officers to spend or reallocate funds upon consultation with, or the approval of, one or more congressional committees. These provisions are impermissible forms of congressional aggrandizement with respect to the execution of the laws.
 
Statement from the White House on Congressional oversight of the stimulus funds

Relevant parts, using 'legalese' so it might be difficult for some people to comprehend that the president* is claiming rights more akin to those employed by people like Vlad and Xi

He is claiming rights from the Constitution-- executive power is vested in the president. The new inspector general is a subordinate officer within the Executive Dept. Trump is correctly saying that Congress can't vest power to other executive officers within the Executive Dept. The president is the IG's supervisor.
 
He is claiming rights from the Constitution-- executive power is vested in the president. The new inspector general is a subordinate officer within the Executive Dept. Trump is correctly saying that Congress can't vest power to other executive officers within the Executive Dept. The president is the IG's supervisor.

Then, it is your belief that there can be no 'independent' inspector generals, that any such person trusted with that position and power must obey only the president and ignore any Congressional requests for information? That belief goes well with the opinions of some in the political punditry class who think Trump is on a path to authoritarianism.

Will Trump grab the power to crack down on political dissent. Will he establish monitoring of American citizens, their travel, their purchases, their associations in order to "suppress another pandemic"?
 
Back
Top Bottom