ABlairican Pie
01-06-2012, 05:20 PM
From Investors.com:
http://news.investors.com/ArticlePrint.aspx?id=596910&p=2
Obama's Recess Appointments: An Impeachable Offense?
Posted 01/05/2012 07:02 PM ET
Constitution: President Obama's nonrecess "recess appointments" can't be excused as over-the-top electioneering. This president has crossed over from socialistic extremism into lawlessness and, perhaps, impeachability.
The U.S. Constitution established a strong presidency — so strong that even one of the most esteemed founding fathers, Patrick Henry, worried it would be kinglike. But this week saw a president exceed even those broad constitutional powers because doing so fits his election-year narrative of a "do-nothing Congress" so well.
Now we have the makings of a banana republic, where the rule of clearly written constitutional law is compromised by a ruler's subjective whim.
The Constitution is crystal clear on the recess appointment authority of the president.
"The president shall have power," Article II, section 2 states, "to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session."
The Senate has not been in recess. And Congress' authority over when it is and isn't in recess is no small matter of parliamentary procedure. Rather, it is a power the Framers explicitly bestowed in Article I, Section 5:
"Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days."
Yet Obama on Wednesday, with no recess in effect and against the publicly stated position of his own Justice Department, made four "recess appointments."
Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
Former Ohio attorney general Richard Cordray was named head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — a new, intrusive federal agency established last year by the Dodd-Frank law — and three spots on the National Labor Relations Board were filled.
The GOP-majority House has been keeping Congress in session, using its lawful power to prevent Obama from steamrolling someone into the CFPB position outside the usual Senate confirmation process because, as House Speaker John Boehner explained Wednesday, "the agency it heads is bad for jobs and bad for the economy."
Some may say these are small-potato government jobs not worth a big confrontation. But if a president can trample the Constitution on these appointments, the door opens for similar abuses of power with Cabinet secretaries and judicial nominations.
As Boehner warned, "The precedent that would be set by this cavalier action would have a devastating effect on the checks and balances that are enshrined in our Constitution."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., until recently agreed with the Obama and Clinton Justice Departments — and with just about every other legal expert, liberal, conservative and middle of the road — that presidents have to wait for Congress to be out of session three days before legally making a recess appointment.
Now he thinks what Obama has done is great, as does House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Why?
Again, because they think it makes Obama and the Democrats look like they're taking on a mean, obstructionist Congress during an election year.
What Obama, with Reid, Pelosi and congressional Democrats in tow, is really taking on, though, is the Constitution and one of the things that keeps America civilized and free: the rule of law.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., recognizes this as a constitutional crisis in which Obama "arrogantly circumvented the American people" and "fundamentally endangers the Congress' role in providing a check on the excesses of the executive branch."
Obama claims he has "an obligation as president to do what I can without them," referring to Congress.
But the Constitution, which Obama took an oath to preserve, protect and defend, says he can't.
The "I" word — I for impeachment — might not yet be on Washingtonian lips, but it might be soon.
http://news.investors.com/ArticlePrint.aspx?id=596910&p=2
Obama's Recess Appointments: An Impeachable Offense?
Posted 01/05/2012 07:02 PM ET
Constitution: President Obama's nonrecess "recess appointments" can't be excused as over-the-top electioneering. This president has crossed over from socialistic extremism into lawlessness and, perhaps, impeachability.
The U.S. Constitution established a strong presidency — so strong that even one of the most esteemed founding fathers, Patrick Henry, worried it would be kinglike. But this week saw a president exceed even those broad constitutional powers because doing so fits his election-year narrative of a "do-nothing Congress" so well.
Now we have the makings of a banana republic, where the rule of clearly written constitutional law is compromised by a ruler's subjective whim.
The Constitution is crystal clear on the recess appointment authority of the president.
"The president shall have power," Article II, section 2 states, "to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session."
The Senate has not been in recess. And Congress' authority over when it is and isn't in recess is no small matter of parliamentary procedure. Rather, it is a power the Framers explicitly bestowed in Article I, Section 5:
"Neither House, during the session of Congress, shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days."
Yet Obama on Wednesday, with no recess in effect and against the publicly stated position of his own Justice Department, made four "recess appointments."
Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
Former Ohio attorney general Richard Cordray was named head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — a new, intrusive federal agency established last year by the Dodd-Frank law — and three spots on the National Labor Relations Board were filled.
The GOP-majority House has been keeping Congress in session, using its lawful power to prevent Obama from steamrolling someone into the CFPB position outside the usual Senate confirmation process because, as House Speaker John Boehner explained Wednesday, "the agency it heads is bad for jobs and bad for the economy."
Some may say these are small-potato government jobs not worth a big confrontation. But if a president can trample the Constitution on these appointments, the door opens for similar abuses of power with Cabinet secretaries and judicial nominations.
As Boehner warned, "The precedent that would be set by this cavalier action would have a devastating effect on the checks and balances that are enshrined in our Constitution."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., until recently agreed with the Obama and Clinton Justice Departments — and with just about every other legal expert, liberal, conservative and middle of the road — that presidents have to wait for Congress to be out of session three days before legally making a recess appointment.
Now he thinks what Obama has done is great, as does House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Why?
Again, because they think it makes Obama and the Democrats look like they're taking on a mean, obstructionist Congress during an election year.
What Obama, with Reid, Pelosi and congressional Democrats in tow, is really taking on, though, is the Constitution and one of the things that keeps America civilized and free: the rule of law.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., recognizes this as a constitutional crisis in which Obama "arrogantly circumvented the American people" and "fundamentally endangers the Congress' role in providing a check on the excesses of the executive branch."
Obama claims he has "an obligation as president to do what I can without them," referring to Congress.
But the Constitution, which Obama took an oath to preserve, protect and defend, says he can't.
The "I" word — I for impeachment — might not yet be on Washingtonian lips, but it might be soon.