House Republicans Introduce Bill to Eliminate Obama’s 39 Czars

[editec]

How about we have a checks and balence system for them?

They are liaisons...not legislators. Why do we need congressional approval for them?

The EPA has more authority than Congress. Tey can enforce regulations even if Congress does not enact any.
Reference cap and trade.

Huh?

Cap and trade is not the law of the land.

I doubt that it will pass until the villians can find a compromise that suits both their sets of masters.

And if they do pass this, this will be a market solution that will serve more like an indulgence to be granted to the pollutors, that will be bought and sold like a commodity.

Doubt me?

How many CO2 credits do you think YOU or I will be getting?

Are we not ALSO pollutors?

Remember the first thing they do is GRANT LICENCE TO POLLUTE to the existing (industrial) pollutors.

Now, seriously...does that really sound like a good way to stop pollution?

If they were serious about that, they'd grant nothing and demand that pollutors begin decreasing their output some percentage every year.

Perhaps if they truly wanted to give it some market solution, they could fine those who fail to achive their goals, and reward those who succeed.

But it's the granting (or setting targets with my idea) where the inevitable trading (AKA corruption) will happen.

 

[Ravi]

Yes, let's make the president, one person, responsible for being an expert on everything.

Funny that this is never an issue when Republican presidents have advisors.

 

[Jarhead]

They are liaisons...not legislators. Why do we need congressional approval for them?

The EPA has more authority than Congress. Tey can enforce regulations even if Congress does not enact any.
Reference cap and trade.

Huh?

Cap and trade is not the law of the land.

I doubt that it will pass until the villians can find a compromise that suits both their sets of masters.

And if they do pass this, this will be a market solution that will serve more like an indulgence to be granted to the pollutors, that will be bought and sold like a commodity.

Doubt me?

How many CO2 credits do you think YOU or I will be getting?

Are we not ALSO pollutors?

Remember the first thing they do is GRANT LICENCE TO POLLUTE to the existing (industrial) pollutors.

Now, seriously...does that really sound like a good way to stop pollution?

If they were serious about that, they'd grant nothing and demand that pollutors begin decreasing their output some percentage every year.

Perhaps if they truly wanted to give it some market solution, they could fine those who fail to achive their goals, and reward those who succeed.

But it's the granting (or setting targets with my idea) where the inevitable trading (AKA corruption) will happen.

Cap and trade is not an environmental friendly idea. It will not minimize emissions. It will only open the door for "pollution" to become a tradeable commodity.

Kind of ironic if you think about it.

 

[gnurat]

Eliminating the Czars is exactly what we voted for. We are not a dictatorship.

Reducing the size of government is what we voted for.

Eliminating the obstacles that Obama has erected is what we voted for.

 

[Jarhead]

Yes, let's make the president, one person, responsible for being an expert on everything.

Funny that this is never an issue when Republican presidents have advisors.

yes it was. You just dont remember it.
It should not be an issue either way.....but our politicians play their little games so we, the people, can fight over which party is more ethical and less hypocritical.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They are liaisons...not legislators. Why do we need congressional approval for them?

The EPA has more authority than Congress. Tey can enforce regulations even if Congress does not enact any.Reference cap and trade.

Well, first of all the EPA is IN the Executive Branch whose job IS enforcement of the laws. Second of all, can you name a regulation that the EPA enforces that was NOT enacted by Congress? TIA

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.




"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."

Administration Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions - FoxNews.com

 

[Two Thumbs]

Thought the republicans wanted to create jobs not eliminate them?

Czars are a way to avoid our laws.

reps just want governement to follows the law

do you take issue with pols finally following the law? Or would you support this if the shoes were on the other feet.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They are liaisons...not legislators. Why do we need congressional approval for them?

The EPA has more authority than Congress. Tey can enforce regulations even if Congress does not enact any.
Reference cap and trade.

Huh?

Cap and trade is not the law of the land.

I doubt that it will pass until the villians can find a compromise that suits both their sets of masters.

And if they do pass this, this will be a market solution that will serve more like an indulgence to be granted to the pollutors, that will be bought and sold like a commodity.

Doubt me?

How many CO2 credits do you think YOU or I will be getting?

Are we not ALSO pollutors?

Remember the first thing they do is GRANT LICENCE TO POLLUTE to the existing (industrial) pollutors.

Now, seriously...does that really sound like a good way to stop pollution?

If they were serious about that, they'd grant nothing and demand that pollutors begin decreasing their output some percentage every year.

Perhaps if they truly wanted to give it some market solution, they could fine those who fail to achive their goals, and reward those who succeed.

But it's the granting (or setting targets with my idea) where the inevitable trading (AKA corruption) will happen.

Why did obama tell congress that if you don't pass cap and trade the EPA will enforce it themself?

 

[Two Thumbs]

We asked them to shrink the size and cost of government;

http://saveamericanowsite.com/blog/?p=352

I worked in DC, and when I did, someone in a Czar’s position made the equivelent of what would be, today, $225,000.00 a year. That’s a lot of money, but add it up: Obama, I believe, currently has 30 Czars working for him, and that totals: $6,750,000.00 a year, and that is just the basic total. Each Czar will need an office staff, and that staff usually consists of three close aides, at $125,000, per year, 4 staffers, at $75,000 per year, and a receptionist at $60,000 per year, and that totals: $725,000.00 per office, times 30 offices equals: $21,750,000.00 per year, added to the $6,750,000.00 for salaries for the Czars, themselves, and we have a total of $28,500,000.00 per year, just to pay for the Czars,, and their staff’s salaries. $28,500,000.00 a year! I know, they’ll say they don’t get paid that much! Well, folks, it’s DC; it is expensive to live in DC, it is expensive to hire proper staff, and it’s expensive, especially if every person in the office, including the Czars, are Cronies of Obama, and they are being paid off for something they have done for him! /emphisis mine

When you're dealing with hundreds of billions, $28 million is not a lot, but it's still $28 million

 

[Jackson]

Get rid of the Czars. Just another example of a bloated administration.

 

[Two Thumbs]

By all means lets get rid of the czars..

lets call them "Special advisors to the President"

How about we have a checks and balence system for them?

They are liaisons...not legislators. Why do we need congressional approval for them?

Not all of them are message boys. Some are in positions of power.

 

[Mr. H.]

Czars upon thars.

 

[bodecea]

The EPA has more authority than Congress. Tey can enforce regulations even if Congress does not enact any.Reference cap and trade.

Well, first of all the EPA is IN the Executive Branch whose job IS enforcement of the laws. Second of all, can you name a regulation that the EPA enforces that was NOT enacted by Congress? TIA

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.




"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."


Administration Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions - FoxNews.com

You understand what the word "regulate" means?

 

[VaYank5150]

(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.
​

Isn't it nice to see how the "new" GOP is getting right to work trying to fix the problems facing so many American citizens, rather than playing political games?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There is waste in government that need be addressed and the overuse of so called czars is certainly an area that should be considered for budget cuts.

A Brief History of White House Czars - TIME

The more interesting criticism, however, is the charge that czarism simply doesn't work. Czars generally don't have budget control or other real authority, and are often caught up in turf battles among Cabinet secretaries and fellow West Wingers. "There've been so many czars over the last 50 years, and they've all been failures," New York University public-service professor Paul Light told the Wall Street Journal. "It's a symbolic gesture of the priority assigned to an issue."

Read more: A Brief History of White House Czars - TIME

I tend to agree with this criticism. Should we really be wasting taxpayers' money on useless, ineffective symbolism?

They should focus on eliminating unnecessary departments within the federal government and reining in the power of some others, like the EPA and FCC.

 

[kiwiman127]

This move is another move by the GOP that leaves a person scratching their head. When GWB had his 35 czar's.
When Fox News asked Rep Darrell Issa if the GOP objected to Bush's czars he said,,,No!
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyiYV2gOwjU[/ame]

This is reminds me of how many members of Congress went along with GWB's spending and now, all of a sudden they became deficit hawks.
Everybody has the right to change their mind. Look at Obama's switch on the tax cuts for the wealthy, (of course he got something in return).

This isn't a complaint post, but more so a post to point out the irony of that happens within the Washington Beltway.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Well, first of all the EPA is IN the Executive Branch whose job IS enforcement of the laws. Second of all, can you name a regulation that the EPA enforces that was NOT enacted by Congress? TIA

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.




"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."


Administration Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions - FoxNews.com

You understand what the word "regulate" means?

If Capo Tarde is not made into law what is there to regulate? If the EPA gose over the heads of Congress they become a power unto themself.
Yes or No?

 

[bodecea]

This move is another move by the GOP that leaves a person scratching their head. When GWB had his 35 czar's.
When Fox News asked Rep Darrell Issa if the GOP objected to Bush's czars he said,,,No!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyiYV2gOwjU

This is reminds me of how many members of Congress went along with GWB's spending and now, all of a sudden they became deficit hawks.
Everybody has the right to change their mind. Look at Obama's switch on the tax cuts for the wealthy, (of course he got something in return).

This isn't a complaint post, but more so a post to point out the irony of that happens within the Washington Beltway.

To me, this is an example of the Republicans being hoisted on their own petard. They brought the issue of Czars out as if it were some kind of problem, hoping people didn't notice that Czars had been around since Reagan. Now they have to look like they are doing something about the faux problem they said existed.....and then they look foolish.

 

[bodecea]

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.




"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."


Administration Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions - FoxNews.com

You understand what the word "regulate" means?

If Capo Tarde is not made into law what is there to regulate? If the EPA gose over the heads of Congress they become a power unto themself.
Yes or No?

That is true, if they make their own laws...but I have yet to see that. IF you can come up with a SPECIFIC regulation they enforce that is NOT traced back to a Congressional mandate?

 

[Jarhead]

This move is another move by the GOP that leaves a person scratching their head. When GWB had his 35 czar's.
When Fox News asked Rep Darrell Issa if the GOP objected to Bush's czars he said,,,No!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyiYV2gOwjU

This is reminds me of how many members of Congress went along with GWB's spending and now, all of a sudden they became deficit hawks.
Everybody has the right to change their mind. Look at Obama's switch on the tax cuts for the wealthy, (of course he got something in return).

This isn't a complaint post, but more so a post to point out the irony of that happens within the Washington Beltway.

To me, this is an example of the Republicans being hoisted on their own petard. They brought the issue of Czars out as if it were some kind of problem, hoping people didn't notice that Czars had been around since Reagan. Now they have to look like they are doing something about the faux problem they said existed.....and then they look foolish.

Sadly, you are 100% correct.
Not sad that YOU are correct. Sad that what you say is correct.
Although, it is sad that I agree with you.