Obama's recess picks

[protege]

Obama defies Congress with 'recess' picks (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/4/obama-unprecedented-recess-appointment/). Basically, Obama went over Congress' heads and nominated some people while they were on recess. Some see it as a violation of the Constitution...specifically the "checks and balances" of the various branches. Thoughts?

[Rapscallion]

Considering he'd get nowhere with the current shower in congress, I think he did the right thing. He's not exactly dealing with a group known to work with him on anything. The budget debacle was proof of that.

Rapscallion

[mikoyan29]

All Presidents do it to some extent. And given that the Republicans have taken the whole "advise and consent" thing to the next level, I can't say that I blame him.

[HYHYBT]

If Congress doesn't want recess appointments, they can approve regular appointments when there isn't a special reason not to do so, rather than routinely denying them all.

And yes, before someone makes an accusation otherwise, I say the same when the parties involved are reversed.

[Greenday]

All Presidents do it to some extent.

Pretty much this. Everyone's done it that I know of. It's really not a big a deal.

[mikoyan29]

If Congress doesn't want recess appointments, they can approve regular appointments when there isn't a special reason not to do so, rather than routinely denying them all.

And yes, before someone makes an accusation otherwise, I say the same when the parties involved are reversed.
I think it sucked that the Democrats pissed around with Bush's nominees and I say the same thing about the Republicans with Obama's nominees. Although it seems like the Republicans are pissing around more, which means that when the Republicans have a President and the Democrats have Congress there will be more pissing around.

[protege]

It's really not a big a deal.

Yeah, but Obama seems to get a free pass lately. He has done some of the things that Bush did...but doesn't generate the same level of ire.

[mikoyan29]

Yeah, but Obama seems to get a free pass lately. He has done some of the things that Bush did...but doesn't generate the same level of ire.
And Bush got pretty much a free pass for his recess appointment. And quite honestly, I don't blame either president for doing it because those departments got work to do. This particular appointment was to a department the GOP doesn't want, so rather than overturning the law, they want to kill it this way.

[Rapscallion]

Yeah, but Obama seems to get a free pass lately.

Such as getting a budget passed?

Rapscallion

[bara]

At least Obama hasnt started any wars.

[HYHYBT]

Positions need to be filled. If Congress chooses to arrange things so that the only way to fill them is by recess appointments, then it's foolish to blame the president for making recess appointments.

[Greenday]

At least Obama hasnt started any wars.

Besides Libya.

[AdminAssistant]

Libya was a joint venture with a lot of NATO allies, and my understanding is that the majority of them where British and French.

[BlaqueKatt]

Some see it as a violation of the Constitution...specifically the "checks and balances" of the various branches. Thoughts?

If by "checks and balances" they mean the automatic opposition to anything any member of the opposing party says or does for no rational or legitimate reason other than it was the opposing parties statement or action, then yes.

The government of our founding fathers worked together despite any differences of opinion to accomplish many things for the overall good of the nation, not for the enrichment of themselves, and their associates at the cost of the people.

Our current government has the same ability to work together as a room full of toddlers attempting to assemble a house of cards.....and is just as stable and successful.....our founding fathers would likely consider most of them treasonous as much as they've sold out the people they are supposed to represent.

[Sleepwalker]

http://www.ourfuture.org/files/images/recessChart.jpg

[Sleepwalker]

I'm sorry, what was that? I couldn't hear you over the sound of my ability to remember past the current administration.

[Panacea]

At least Obama hasnt started any wars.

No, but he's finished a couple.

I'm getting pretty sick of the Senate abusing the "advise and consent" clause and using it to hold up the Executive Branch. If Obama is wrong to make the appointments, the Senate is just as wrong to delay their Constitutional duty to advise and consent.

[Draco]

Libya was a joint venture with a lot of NATO allies, and my understanding is that the majority of them where British and French.

And there were coalitions for Afghanistan and Iraq.


The government of our founding fathers worked together despite any differences of opinion to accomplish many things for the overall good of the nation, not for the enrichment of themselves, and their associates at the cost of the people.
Before or after the various duels, to the death or otherwise? :p
Then again... CSPAN would be a lot more interesting to watch...

I'm sorry, what was that? I couldn't hear you over the sound of my ability to remember past the current administration.
How about something that's relatively neutral and with references? Rather than a "progressive" (and boy do I use that term loosely!) site?


No, but he's finished a couple.

I'm getting pretty sick of the Senate abusing the "advise and consent" clause and using it to hold up the Executive Branch. If Obama is wrong to make the appointments, the Senate is just as wrong to delay their Constitutional duty to advise and consent.
Backed out before the fight was over? Yeah, he's done that. Let's just pray it doesn't end up in chaos. And yes, it can become much worse.

The Executive NOMINATES, the Legislature APPROVES. Maybe if he's tired of his nominees being rejected, it's time to pick new ones?

[Sleepwalker]

Draco: Are you saying it is inaccurate? That Obama has appointed more recess appointees than the Bushes, Reagan and Clinton?

[HYHYBT]

The Executive NOMINATES, the Legislature APPROVES. Maybe if he's tired of his nominees being rejected, it's time to pick new ones?
That only works so long as the legislature is being reasonable. They're not, and haven't been for quite a while. Once it becomes plain that they're not going to approve *anybody* (or, in some milder cases, anybody who would ever be nominated by a president not of their party) then it's the legislature which is in default, so to speak.