Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
(The Hill)- A group of House Republicans introduced a bill on Wednesday to rein in the various czars in the Obama administration.
Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and 28 other House Republicans introduced legislation to do away with the informal, paid advisers President Obama has employed over the past two years.
The legislation, which was introduced in the last Congress but was not allowed to advance under Democratic control, would do away with the 39 czars Obama has employed during his administration.
The bill defines a czar as a head of any task force, council, policy office within the Executive Office of the President, or similar office established by or at the direction of the President who is appointed to a position that would otherwise require Senate confirmation.
The EPA doesn't have a Czar...but don't let that stop Reb.
So you agree that the EPA can over rule congress.
No, the EPA can not over rule Congress....you have it backwards.
The Congress can over rule the EPA measures with passed legislation.
No, the EPA can not over rule Congress....you have it backwards.
The Congress can over rule the EPA measures with passed legislation.
I dont believe any agency should have the right to make decisions without legislation.
It should be the other way around.
the EPA should request legislation and then congress should decide....not that congress needs to encat legislation to overule the EPA.
Yes, the "what comes first syndrome, the chicken or the egg?"
Congress CREATED the EPA and allotted them with certain duties, I believe?
So, unless the EPA is given another directive/goal from congress, or limits what control they were allocated, then I think it is legally and constitutionally, within the EPA's realm to do such.
this DOES NOT MEAN that I agree with the EPA or disagree with the actions of the EPA....I'm just saying I think Congress created them, thus they do have legitimacy. I could be wrong on that, and the department is not one that was created by Congress but they in the least are funded by congress, with their appropriation of such.
Cut the Obamy's bloated posse. It will save American Taxpayers loads of cash and they're probably Unconstitutional as well. The President should voluntarily cut his posse. He shouldn't have to be forced. Time for sacrifice Mr. President.
He didWhy doesn't the President just voluntarily cut his posse? It could put an end to this issue. Does he really need 39 Czars? How bout some Bipartisanship? I think if he agreed to ditch half his Czars,this issue would go away. The People want Bipartisanship no?
Well obama did elimnate one czar position
Hope and Change: Obama eliminates transparency czar
Hope and Change: Obama eliminates transparency czar Hot Air
I guess we must take baby steps.
Cut the Obamy's bloated posse. It will save American Taxpayers loads of cash and they're probably Unconstitutional as well. The President should voluntarily cut his posse. He shouldn't have to be forced. Time for sacrifice Mr. President.
If an advisor in the Executive branch has no legal authority, they're exempt from the Article 2, Section 2 clause I think.
Instead of going all napalm about it and banning advisors to any President outright, Congress should just monitor the positions and actions of these individuals to ensure none of them overstep their limits on authority.
So you agree that the EPA can over rule congress.
No, the EPA can not over rule Congress....you have it backwards.
The Congress can over rule the EPA measures with passed legislation.
Why did obama say they would if congress did not pass cap and trade?
No, the EPA can not over rule Congress....you have it backwards.
The Congress can over rule the EPA measures with passed legislation.
Why did obama say they would if congress did not pass cap and trade?
What he was saying was a WARNING.....that they can sit back and twiddle their thumbs pretending like issues do not need to be addressed and watch the EPA make the decisions instead of them if they wish or they can do something about it beforehand..... basically THIS would FORCE Congress to legislate....especially if they differ with what the EPA was doing.
Why did obama say they would if congress did not pass cap and trade?
What he was saying was a WARNING.....that they can sit back and twiddle their thumbs pretending like issues do not need to be addressed and watch the EPA make the decisions instead of them if they wish or they can do something about it beforehand..... basically THIS would FORCE Congress to legislate....especially if they differ with what the EPA was doing.
So even though Congress did not want to pass cap and trade the EPA would do it anyway.
What he was saying was a WARNING.....that they can sit back and twiddle their thumbs pretending like issues do not need to be addressed and watch the EPA make the decisions instead of them if they wish or they can do something about it beforehand..... basically THIS would FORCE Congress to legislate....especially if they differ with what the EPA was doing.
So even though Congress did not want to pass cap and trade the EPA would do it anyway.
did Obama say THAT specifically or is that what you read in to his statement?
thats what it take to ratify a treatythe EPA can not agree to a treaty with other nations, and this is what I thought cap and trade was? this can only be done constitutionally by congress....or maybe it is specifically by the 2/3's vote of the Senate, I would need to refresh myself on the topic....
Or did congress already give up their treaty powers to the president decades ago? still not certain?
What he was saying was a WARNING.....that they can sit back and twiddle their thumbs pretending like issues do not need to be addressed and watch the EPA make the decisions instead of them if they wish or they can do something about it beforehand..... basically THIS would FORCE Congress to legislate....especially if they differ with what the EPA was doing.
So even though Congress did not want to pass cap and trade the EPA would do it anyway.
did Obama say THAT specifically or is that what you read in to his statement?
Let's call them what they are CZARS.
Cut the Obamy's bloated posse. It will save American Taxpayers loads of cash and they're probably Unconstitutional as well. The President should voluntarily cut his posse. He shouldn't have to be forced. Time for sacrifice Mr. President.
If an advisor in the Executive branch has no legal authority, they're exempt from the Article 2, Section 2 clause I think.
Instead of going all napalm about it and banning advisors to any President outright, Congress should just monitor the positions and actions of these individuals to ensure none of them overstep their limits on authority.
Let's call them what they are CZARS. The more CZARS you have the bigger the government. It's time to do some real change and make the government small again.
So even though Congress did not want to pass cap and trade the EPA would do it anyway.
did Obama say THAT specifically or is that what you read in to his statement?
Is there another way to read into it?
1. The fact that it was the Bush Administration who popularized appointing "czar" in the federal government that puts into question the motives by the GOP to scrap their own system - but only after they were voted out of office.Bush Administration Czars (January 2001 to January 2009)
*****************************************************************
Abstinence Czar (Randal Tobias)
AIDS Czar (4 Czars: Scott Evertz, Joe O’Neill, Carol Thompson, Jeffrey Crowley)
Bank Bailout Czar (Neel Kashkari)
Bioethics Czar ( Leon Kass)
Bird flu Czar (Stewart Simonson)
Birth control czar (Erik Keroack)
Budget czar (3 Czars: Mitchell Daniels, Joshua Bolton, Rob Portman)
Clean Up Czar (2 Czars: Jessie Roberson & James Rispoli)
Communications Czar (Dan Bartlett)
Cyber Security Czar, Cyber Czar (2 Czars: Richard Clarke, Rod Beckstrom)
Democracy Czar (Elliott Abrams)
Domestic Policy Czar (Karl Rove)
Drug Czar (John P. Walters)
Faith-Based Czar, Faith Czar (4 Czars: Don Willett, John Dilulio, Jim Towey, Jay Hein)
Food Safety Czar (David W.K. Acheson)
Global AIDS Czar (2 Czars: Randall Tobias, Mark Dybul)
Health Czar for WTC, World Trade Center Health Czar (John Howard)
Health IT Czar (David Brailer)
Homeland Security Czar (Michael Chertoff)
Homeless Czar, Homelessness Czar (Phil Mangano)
Gulf Coast Reconstruction Czar, Hurricane Katrina Recovery Czar (Donald E. Powell)
Intelligence Czar (2 Czars: John Negroponte & John Michael McConnell)
Manufacturing Czar (2 Czars: Albert Frink & William G. Sutton)
Policy Czar (Micahel Gerson)
Public Diplomacy Czar (2 Czars: Karen Hughes & James Glassman)
Reading Czar (G. Reid Lyon)
Regulatory Czar (2 Czars: John D. Graham & Susan Dudley)
Science Czar (John Marburger)
Terrorism Czar (3 Czars: Richard A. Clarke, Wayne Downing, John O. Brennan)
War Czar (Douglas Lute)
http://whitenoiseinsanity.com/2009/09/07/george-bush-36-czars-working-president-obama-32-czars/
If an advisor in the Executive branch has no legal authority, they're exempt from the Article 2, Section 2 clause I think.
Instead of going all napalm about it and banning advisors to any President outright, Congress should just monitor the positions and actions of these individuals to ensure none of them overstep their limits on authority.
Let's call them what they are CZARS. The more CZARS you have the bigger the government. It's time to do some real change and make the government small again.
They are not czars, they are special advisors to the President that have no signatory authority.
Using the term CZAR is in fact a denigration, and as long as the MSM allows this type of bull shit, rhetorical form of propaganda from any faction to continue, the country will remain divided along made up bull shit rhetorical lines drawn in the sand by pundits who have no one but themselves to enrich.
