Republicans block Obama from recess appointments

[Truthmatters]

While on Summer Recess, Congress Blocks Recess Appointments - ProPublica


In an effort to block President Obama from making recess appointments—which the Constitution allows presidents to do—Congressional Republicans have kept Congress technically in session.

The Washington Examiner explains:

The Republican-controlled House used a procedural move to help force this issue. Though it's the Senate that must confirm presidential appointments, under the U.S. Constitution, it cannot adjourn for more than three days without the approval of the House.

So instead of adjourning, both the House and Senate will be conducting what are known as “pro forma” sessions. What that entails, essentially, is having a member of Congress stick around the Capitol to strike the gavel for what are sometimes seconds-long sessions, according to the Examiner.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Well, since Obama is on record saying he thinks they are a bad thing when Bush did it, I don't think he will mind much.

Also, this is the third thread on this.

 

[Truthmatters]

well I guess some presidents just have to run their governments without people.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Good! Fuck him.

 

[del]

well I guess some presidents just have to run their governments without people.

i guess you're a moronic partisan hack.


WASHINGTON, Nov. 20 — Who says the Senate cannot act quickly? It conducted a full day’s business in less than 30 seconds on Tuesday.

Of course, there was no real business to conduct. But fearing that President Bush would again use a Congressional recess to install disputed executive branch appointees without Senate confirmation, Democrats convened the Senate for the first of four microsessions to be held during the holiday break, precisely to thwart such an end run.

Democrats Move to Block Bush Appointments - New York Times

 

[Trajan]

we know this....http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-move-to-block-obama-recess-appointments.html

 

[Baruch Menachem]

They will be back in September. There really is no need for recess appointments anymore. That was only in there in the first place because the country was so big and travel so hard that calling a meeting for an appointment was difficult. They only met 5 months out of the year anyway.

These days it is a power subject to abuse.

If it was bad in Bush's day, it is bad now.

Considering the games that go on, I would support an amendment to end the practice.

 

[oreo]

While on Summer Recess, Congress Blocks Recess Appointments - ProPublica


In an effort to block President Obama from making recess appointments—which the Constitution allows presidents to do—Congressional Republicans have kept Congress technically in session.

The Washington Examiner explains:

The Republican-controlled House used a procedural move to help force this issue. Though it's the Senate that must confirm presidential appointments, under the U.S. Constitution, it cannot adjourn for more than three days without the approval of the House.

So instead of adjourning, both the House and Senate will be conducting what are known as “pro forma” sessions. What that entails, essentially, is having a member of Congress stick around the Capitol to strike the gavel for what are sometimes seconds-long sessions, according to the Examiner.

Thank God--the congress may have come back into session to find out that Obama appointed his own personal golf cady-at a billion per year in taxpayer dollars--

 

[Trajan]

They will be back in September. There really is no need for recess appointments anymore. That was only in there in the first place because the country was so big and travel so hard that calling a meeting for an appointment was difficult. They only met 5 months out of the year anyway.

These days it is a power subject to abuse.

If it was bad in Bush's day, it is bad now.

Considering the games that go on, I would support an amendment to end the practice.

I agree. recess appt's are legal so playing games is just dishonest. so is imho filibustering or putting holds on nominees, if a pres. wants to appoint someone they deserve an up or down vote rep or dem president, period.

 

[oreo]

They will be back in September. There really is no need for recess appointments anymore. That was only in there in the first place because the country was so big and travel so hard that calling a meeting for an appointment was difficult. They only met 5 months out of the year anyway.

These days it is a power subject to abuse.

If it was bad in Bush's day, it is bad now.

Considering the games that go on, I would support an amendment to end the practice.

I agree. recess appt's are legal so playing games is just dishonest. so is imho filibustering or putting holds on nominees, if a pres. wants to appoint someone they deserve an up or down vote rep or dem president, period.

I don't think that was the intent.

The problem is Obama has appointed more CZARS to his administration--than any other President in the History of the United States--and even Democrat senators have complained about him doing this--as CZARS do NOT ANSWER to the congress--and are just appointees of the POTUS--at taxpayer expense.

 

[Trajan]

They will be back in September. There really is no need for recess appointments anymore. That was only in there in the first place because the country was so big and travel so hard that calling a meeting for an appointment was difficult. They only met 5 months out of the year anyway.

These days it is a power subject to abuse.

If it was bad in Bush's day, it is bad now.

Considering the games that go on, I would support an amendment to end the practice.

I agree. recess appt's are legal so playing games is just dishonest. so is imho filibustering or putting holds on nominees, if a pres. wants to appoint someone they deserve an up or down vote rep or dem president, period.

I don't think that was the intent.

The problem is Obama has appointed more CZARS to his administration--than any other President in the History of the United States--and even Democrat senators have complained about him doing this--as CZARS do NOT ANSWER to the congress--and are just appointees of the POTUS--at taxpayer expense.

that matters not here, as I said, he should be able to nominate them and get an up or down vote, if they are voted down then he can submit someone else. .....

 

[rdean]

They want the "boy king" "Man Child" to fail. Of course, race has nothing to do with it.

 

[Trajan]

They want the "boy king" "Man Child" to fail. Of course, race has nothing to do with it.

right becasue bush was white and they pulled the same hit on him and Clinton et al....

 

[Harry Dresden]

They want the "boy king" "Man Child" to fail. Of course, race has nothing to do with it.

what happened to you when you were a kid Dean?......did white Republican Kids kick your ass everyday going to school?......maybe if you weren't such a pussy and fought back they would have left you alone......

 

[Truthmatters]

It is not the same thing.

Bush used recess appointments over and over.


Who blocked him from it?

 

[Truthmatters]

They will be back in September. There really is no need for recess appointments anymore. That was only in there in the first place because the country was so big and travel so hard that calling a meeting for an appointment was difficult. They only met 5 months out of the year anyway.

These days it is a power subject to abuse.

If it was bad in Bush's day, it is bad now.

Considering the games that go on, I would support an amendment to end the practice.

I agree. recess appt's are legal so playing games is just dishonest. so is imho filibustering or putting holds on nominees, if a pres. wants to appoint someone they deserve an up or down vote rep or dem president, period.

I don't think that was the intent.

The problem is Obama has appointed more CZARS to his administration--than any other President in the History of the United States--and even Democrat senators have complained about him doing this--as CZARS do NOT ANSWER to the congress--and are just appointees of the POTUS--at taxpayer expense.

There is no such thing as a czar in the US governmnet

 

[del]

It is not the same thing.

Bush used recess appointments over and over.


Who blocked him from it?

read the thread, twatwaffle.

here, i'll help you. was bush a republican or a democrat?

if you said republican, you win!

now, who would want to block a republican president's appointments?

if you said democrat, you win again! you're on a roll!

now, is obama a republican or a democrat?

i'm pulling for you, clitwhistle! you can do it!

 

[Full-Auto]

It is not the same thing.

Bush used recess appointments over and over.


Who blocked him from it?

read the thread, twatwaffle.

here, i'll help you. was bush a republican or a democrat?

if you said republican, you win!

now, who would want to block a republican president's appointments?

if you said democrat, you win again! you're on a roll!

now, is obama a republican or a democrat?

i'm pulling for you, clitwhistle! you can do it!

 

[elvis]

clitwhistle....

.

 

[MeBelle]

Regardless if the legal procedure is deemed outdated by some, it is still legal.

Let's see...who has used it recently? June 2011

"Before the Memorial Day break, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said he would not agree to a unanimous consent request to allow the Senate to adjourn, and circulated a letter, signed by all 47 Republican Senators including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., backing him up. Unless Reid were to get approval from every GOP Senator allowing unanimous agreement, it would force Democrats to cast embarrassing votes to adjourn at a time when they haven’t even passed a budget."
The Dem Senate? Of course, I only pasted the highlights

Senate likely to block Obama recess appointments over July 4th break

But I kinda like this one better! August 2011

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced that the chamber would be in "pro forma" sessions throughout August, effectively blocking President Obama from making any recess appointments.
Among other possibilities, the move will prevent Obama from appointing a new head of the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as well as a new member of the National Labor Relations Board, which has a vacancy opening up later this month."

When Democrats took over Congress in 2007, Senate Majority Leader Reid blocked Bush from making any recess appointments by holding such sessions, which could last as little as a few seconds, with the clerk opening the chamber and a Senator striking a gavel to close it.

Reid also agreed to hold "pro forma" sessions last fall during while Senators were out campaigning, and over Memorial Day break. On Tuesday, he announced the Senate would hold eight of these sessions in August and one in early September until the chamber returns from break.

Senate blocks Obama from making recess appointments during August break | Philip Klein | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Almost seems as though Reid is trying to save face and 'one-up' the House.

Just MHO of course.