Czar-dom

[Chicopee John]

Jones' resignation puts focus on criticism of Obama's 'czars'

 

From Ed Hornick CNN

 

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As one so-called White House czar resigned over the weekend, President Obama announced the appointment of another one Monday, much to the frustration of Republican critics.

 

 

Van Jones resigned from his "green jobs czar" post amid criticism.

 

By some accounts, Obama has nearly 30 czars, who are officially called special advisers. The czars cover issues from AIDS and health care to Middle East peace.

 

Czars are nothing new. They date back to early presidents, including Franklin Roosevelt. Republicans also had czars: Richard Nixon had an energy czar, and George H.W. Bush appointed the first drug czar.

 

But the positions are not subject to congressional oversight or Senate confirmation, which rankles critics of the administration.

 

"What you see with President Obama is this reliance on czars," GOP strategist Kevin Madden said. "And I think there are probably even some corridors of power within the administration that probably didn't like the idea that you have czars that are encroaching on their policy portfolios."

 

David Gergen, a CNN contributor and former aide to past presidents, said the czar controversy has given Republicans an opening to question the administration's decisions.

 

"Now with President Obama, we have a number of people who answer to the president but not to Congress," he said. "When the Congress looks at it and sees over 30 people with czar titles, it naturally begins to worry that a lot of authority has been taken away and stripped of the Cabinet."

 

The main issue, Gergen said, is that there are "about 25 too many" czars in the current White House.

 

Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, said that number is an "affront to the Constitution."

 

"We have about two dozen so-called czars -- the 'pay czar,' the 'car czar,' all these czars in the White House," said Alexander, who is the Senate Republican Conference chairman.

 

But Alexander said the lack of oversight is adding "fuel to the fire by those who think Washington is taking over everything."

 

Democratic strategist Maria Cardona said the number of czars is not the issue, because "this is something that happens in all administrations."

 

Donna Brazile, a CNN contributor and Democratic strategist, defended the Obama administration's use of the special advisers.

 

"President Obama is assembling the best and the brightest to help transform our economy to ensure that we can adapt to the new conditions that face us each and every day," she said. "These are people with special expertise."

 

Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, chairman of the House Republican Conference, said Sunday that Obama should suspend any future czar position as Congress "carefully examines the background and qualifications of the more than 30 individuals who've been appointed to these czar positions."

 

On Monday, Obama appointed Ron Bloom to be special adviser for manufacturing policy, or the "auto czar."

 

"Ron has the knowledge and experience necessary to lead the way in creating the good-paying manufacturing jobs of the future," Obama said in a statement Sunday. "We must do more to harness the power of American ingenuity and productivity so that we can put people back to work and unleash our full economic potential."

 

Republicans have grumbled about the appointments since the beginning of his administration, but revelations about the past of Obama's green jobs czar, Van Jones, caused the grumbling to grow louder.

 

Jones resigned early Saturday after an onslaught of criticism aimed at his past statements and affiliations.

 

In 2004, Jones signed a petition that called for an investigation of whether government officials allowed the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

 

In a statement last week, Jones said of the petition on the Web site 911truth.org: "I do not agree with this statement and it certainly does not reflect my views now or ever."

 

Jones had not carefully reviewed the language in the petition before signing, an administration source said last week. Watch more about the Jones controversy »

 

As to whether the president ordered the resignation, White House adviser David Axelrod said "absolutely not. This was Van Jones' own decision."

 

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that Obama accepted Jones' resignation because "the agenda of this president was bigger than any one individual."

 

"The president thanks Van Jones for his service in the first eight months, and helping to coordinate renewable energy jobs that are going to lay the foundation for our future economic growth," he said.

 

 

Jones, in a statement, said he did not want to distract from the administration's agenda.

 

"I cannot in good conscience ask my colleagues to expend precious time and energy defending or explaining my past," he said.

 

[calfoxwc]

like 2003, the not so distant past?

 

their words are all smoke and mirrors.

 

Big trouble ahead, I think.

[Mr. T]

Sounds like a lot of political rhetoric.

 

Here is a good question,

 

"would you buy a used car from any of these czars?" NO & Hell NO

 

The individuals that are holding down jobs as czars would have a hard time being confirmed as cabinet members. and Obama knows that, so he is trying to step around the law (constitution) and does not want congress to be able to challenge anything he does.

[smalls1129]

Here's the real question and concern about these Czar's ("Special Advisors). If they are contributing to policy discussions...more accurately helping shape (word) policy then are they Unconstitutional? Please try not to run into respective corners here; it is a legit question.

[Guest mz.]

I don't know whether they are constitutional or not, but czars have been around forever. Obama appointng them is nothing new/scary/fascist/Communist/socialist. In fact, they seemed to multiply under the W administration. I don't see what all the crying is about...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._...ve_branch_czars

 

President's name In office Number of "czar" jobs Number of appointees Number of new positions

Franklin Roosevelt 1933-1945 12 19

Harry Truman 1945-1953 6 6

Dwight Eisenhower 1953-1961 1 1

Lyndon Johnson 1963-1969 3 3

Richard Nixon 1969-1974 2 4

Gerald Ford 1974-1977 1 1

Jimmy Carter 1977-1981 2 3

Ronald Reagan 1981-1989 1 1

George H. W. Bush 1989-1993 2 3

Bill Clinton 1993-2001 6 9

George W. Bush 2001-2009 35 45

Barack Obama 2009 32 34

[heckofajobbrownie]

No, there's nothing unconstitutional about it. There are thousands of political appointees that don't require Congressional approval, and specific jobs that do.

 

And there are thousands of political appointees and hires that contribute to policy-making. The idea that anyone who has a hand in the legislative or agency process must be approved by the Senate is crazy.

 

The only problem is with appearances here, not legality. Obama doesn't want to be seen to be skirting the process, so Republicans are claiming that he is.

[smalls1129]

The only deal is that the question has never (to my knowledge) been raised about Czars helping to write specific policy. They have always been thought of has a more informal group of advisers. Whether it really is a big deal or not, I don't know, but if they are writing policy then they have to be approved by the Congress (like Cabinet Members). I would think the only reason this matters at all is b/c some of President Obama's Czar would never pass, so perception can lead one to think that they are Czars instead of Cabinet Members is to side step conformation.

[smalls1129]

No, there's nothing unconstitutional about it. There are thousands of political appointees that don't require Congressional approval, and specific jobs that do.

 

And there are thousands of political appointees and hires that contribute to policy-making. The idea that anyone who has a hand in the legislative or agency process must be approved by the Senate is crazy.

 

The only problem is with appearances here, not legality. Obama doesn't want to be seen to be skirting the process, so Republicans are claiming that he is.

 

 

But has you said those are POLITICAL appointees, not Presidential appointees. Article II outlines the process for Presidential appointees:

 

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.

[calfoxwc]

Van Jones, Obama appointee. Communist and racist.

 

Name one of those Bush appointed.

 

That's the story we are dealing with right now.

[Mr. T]

T...where's that site you posted the other day??? The one that listed all the 'czars'.

 

I'm gonna repeat myself but from what I could read on that list, many of those appointed had no real knowledge (that we could see) or experience in the field to which they had been appointed. There were a few notable exceptions (can't remember who right now)...but most were obvious campaign contributors or lobbyists put in positions of influence in this administration.

 

I have to give Obama credit...he CHANGED the way Washington pays off their 'friends' now...

 

 

Here you go Hot legs! Is this the one?

 

Czars

[smalls1129]

Not one comment about what the Constitution actually says?