PDA

View Full Version : The White House Said It Will Not Let Czars Go Before Congress


America
10-25-2009, 04:09 PM
The White House has told Congress it will reject calls for many of President Obama's policy czars to testify before Congress - a decision senators said goes against the president's promises of transparency and openness and treads on Congress' constitutional mandate to investigate the administration's actions.

Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican, said White House counsel Greg Craig told her in a meeting Wednesday that they will not make available any of the czars who work in the White House and don't have to go through Senate confirmation. She said he was "murky" on whether other czars outside of the White House would be allowed to come before Congress.

Miss Collins said that doesn't make sense when some of those czars are actually making policy or negotiating on behalf of Mr. Obama.

"I think Congress should be able to call the president's climate czar, Carol Browner, the energy and environment czar, to ask her about the negotiations she conducted with the automobile industry that led to very significant policy changes with regard to emissions standards," Miss Collins said at a hearing Thursday that examined the proliferation of czars.

The debate goes to the heart of weighty constitutional issues about separation of powers. The president argues that he should be allowed to have advisers who are free to give him confidential advice without having to fear being called to testify about it. Democrats and Republicans in Congress, though, argue that those in office who actually craft policy should be able to be summoned to testify because they do more than just give the president advice.

At issue are the 18 positions Miss Collins says Mr. Obama has created since he took office. Of those, she says 10 - the White House says eight - are in the executive office and not subject to Freedom of Information Act requests or requests for testimony.

Czar is an informal term given to the positions.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent and chairman of the government affairs committee, asked the White House to provide a witness for Thursday's hearing but it did not send one.

In a letter last week to Miss Collins, though, Mr. Craig explained that the White House is not trying to circumvent Congress.

"We recognize that it is theoretically possible that a president could create new positions that inhibit transparency or undermine congressional oversight. That is simply not the case, however, in the current administration," Mr. Craig wrote.

Link:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/23/czar-war-escalates-between-congress-white-house/?feat=home_headlines

disrupter
10-26-2009, 01:31 AM
I do have a problem with this stance.

I know hearings will invariably be used as political theater by Congressional opponents rather than as a conduit of enlightenment & truth,
but Obama has the disease of the presidency, the desire to act with impunity.

Unelected Bush & Cheney had this disease to a point of war criminality as well as fraudulent occupation of the Whitehouse,
but sadly Obama is often using similar arguments for similar positions.

Yes Obama you were elected, but that is no reason to take the same stances as the war criminals who were evicted last November.

The president argues that he should be allowed to have advisers who are free to give him confidential advice without having to fear being called to testify about it.

This is almost verbatim Cheney about secret talks with Ken Lay of Enron fame, making decisions about US energy policies.

Hmm, how did that turn out? Enron & Duke energy ripped off Californians for Billions of dollars & electric blackouts that drove power costs wildly out of sight.

Boogie man
10-26-2009, 10:58 AM
I do have a problem with this stance.

I know hearings will invariably be used as political theater by Congressional opponents rather than as a conduit of enlightenment & truth,
but Obama has the disease of the presidency, the desire to act with impunity.

Unelected Bush & Cheney had this disease to a point of war criminality as well as fraudulent occupation of the Whitehouse,
but sadly Obama is often using similar arguments for similar positions.

Yes Obama you were elected, but that is no reason to take the same stances as the war criminals who were evicted last November.



This is almost verbatim Cheney about secret talks with Ken Lay of Enron fame, making decisions about US energy policies.

Hmm, how did that turn out? Enron & Duke energy ripped off Californians for Billions of dollars & electric blackouts that drove power costs wildly out of sight.

Can you explain how Bush and Cheney were "unelected"?