The Constitution Doesn't Mention Czars

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Trajan, Apr 11, 2011.

  1. Trajan
    Offline

    Trajan conscientia mille testes

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2010
    Messages:
    29,048
    Thanks Received:
    4,751
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    The Bay Area Soviet
    Ratings:
    +4,756
    an article by George Schultz. I agree with his reasoning and his conclusio.
    Please read the article, he speaks to the transparency lost as exemplified by the Iran- Contra scandal as well and how it is germane to the overarching point.



    The Constitution Doesn't Mention Czars
    Unaccountable White House aides are a product of a broken cabinet-nomination process. This is not the form of government the Founders intended.


    A pattern of governance has emerged in Washington that departs substantially from that envisaged in our Constitution. Under our basic concept of governance: (1) a president and vice president are elected; and (2) the departments of government are staffed by constitutional officers including secretaries, undersecretaries, assistant secretaries and others who are nominated by the president and confirmed for service by the consent of the Senate. They are publicly accountable and may be called to testify under oath about their activities.

    Over time, this form of governance has changed. Presidents sometimes assume that the bureaucracy will try to capture a secretary and his or her immediate staff so that they will develop a departmental, rather than a White House, point of view. So presidents will name someone in the White House to oversee the department and keep a tight rein on its activities.

    In national security and foreign policy, the National Security Council (NSC) was established after World War II by the National Security Act of 1947. As late as 1961, under President Dwight Eisenhower, the NSC was supported by a small staff headed by an executive secretary with a "passion for anonymity" and limited to a coordinating role. In subsequent administrations, that passion disappeared and staff members took on operational duties that formerly were the responsibility of constitutionally confirmed cabinet officials. This aggrandizement of the staff function then spread into fields far beyond national security.

    More recently, the situation has been worsened by the difficulty of getting presidential nominees to cabinet and subcabinet positions approved and in place. The White House vetting process has become exhaustive, with potential appointees required to fill out extensive questionnaires on such things as foreign travel and personal acquaintances, let alone financial matters. Mistakes are potentially subject to criminal penalties. The result is a drawn-out and often disagreeable process from the time a person agrees to a job to the actual nomination.

    Formal nominations do not necessarily receive quick consideration by Senate committees, which routinely request additional information. Sometimes a nomination, voted legitimately out of the committee, can be put on hold indefinitely as one member of the Senate uses the hold as a bargaining chip to get some matter, often unrelated, settled to his or her satisfaction.

    more at-

    George P. Shultz: The Constitution Doesn't Mention Czars - WSJ.com
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,710
    Thanks Received:
    4,237
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,138
  3. bodecea
    Online

    bodecea Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Messages:
    88,967
    Thanks Received:
    10,361
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    #HasNoClothes
    Ratings:
    +23,616
    That's right. It doesn't mention Cabinet members either.
     
  4. del
    Offline

    del BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    45,052
    Thanks Received:
    9,830
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +9,885
    it doesn't mention asst deputy undersecretaries either.

    so what?
     
  5. VaYank5150
    Offline

    VaYank5150 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,779
    Thanks Received:
    1,047
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +1,055
    Still searching for the terms "supercarrier", "attack drone" and "nuclear warhead" in the CONUS. Sorry, that is "new clear" for Caribou Barbie...
     
  6. BlindBoo
    Offline

    BlindBoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2010
    Messages:
    19,590
    Thanks Received:
    2,194
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,388
    Rather than creating a new position within the administration with no oversight or disclosure from the government -- a secretive post, by some conservative accounts -- a czar is exactly the opposite: it's a position within the administration that the president wants to highlight, and does so by creating the title of czar for a person who is already in charge of an important topic.

    Political Heat: Unwarranted fears over Obama's czars

    President Obama's 'Czars' - Politico Staff - POLITICO.com

    Does the country really need a Great Lakes (Czar) Clean Up supervisor Cabinet position?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,156
    Thanks Received:
    19,792
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,243
    Where does the Constitution allow an Air Force?
     
  8. martybegan
    Online

    martybegan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Messages:
    29,278
    Thanks Received:
    3,998
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,899
    From article II

    "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."

    Basically it covers "officers" of the executive branch, which we call cabinet members. It appears that the president can appoint people to certain tasks without the "advice and consent of the senate", but still needs legislative permission to do so.

    People's issues with "czars" come from thier not needing senate approval mostly. It is seen as an end run around senate oversight.
     

Share This Page