You remember the Commissar from old Cold War era movies, don’t you? He or she was a political officer attached to a department of the Soviet government (including the Soviet military) to ensure compliance with the official dictates of the Communist party by all government employees and soldiers. Well, guess what Mr. Unitary Executive has just gone and adopted by executive order, straight out of the Stalinist-Leninist handbook (via The New York Times):
In an executive order published last week in the Federal Register, Mr. Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president’s priorities.
This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats.
The White House said the executive order was not meant to rein in any one agency. But business executives and consumer advocates said the administration was particularly concerned about rules and guidance issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
(cont.)
This is a direct attack on Congress’ authority. It ensures that no matter what the law may require, no government agency under the control of the Executive branch may formulate and pass regulations or rules implementing that law without the official stamp of approval by the White House. In effect, it is rule by fiat, or dictate if you like. I guess we all know what “Decider” stands for now in the Bush lexicon, if we weren’t sure of it before: Dictator.
Of course, in our twisted Orwellian BushWorldTM (or should that be CheneyWorld?) that’s not how the White House is spinning this power grab. Quite the contrary:
, n
In an interview on Monday, Jeffrey A. Rosen, general counsel at the White House Office of Management and Budget, said, “This is a classic good-government measure that will make federal agencies more open and accountable.”
I imagine he said that with a straight face. Irony is lost on these people.
Not surprisingly business groups favor the move. Who wouldn’t like Mr. Bush deciding how safe your factory must be for its workers, or how many pollutants into our water supply and/or particulates and greenhouse gases it can emit into the air? Not any CEO that I’ve ever known or read about.
Imagine a world where the FDA fast tracks approval of drugs for pharamaceutical companies that contribute campaign contributions to the party’s coffers. Where the Commerce and Justice Departments never see a corpaorate merger they don’t like. Where insider trading becomes impossible to prosecute because the rules are so lenient. Where emission controls on coal and oil burning plants are effectively eliminated. Where Banks can invest your savings in whatever they like, regardless of the risk. Where the EEOC primarily takes cases of “reverse discrimination” involving white males. Where the military oath is changed to swear allegiance to the President as well as to the Constitution. Sounds lovely doesn’t it?
Bush effectively neutered Congress when his party had control because he allowed them to wallow in corruption, graft and pork for the folks back home. He also kept them compliant with his ability to win elections and raise money for their campaigns. Now that the Democrats control Congress, the gloves are off. Or I should say the velvet glove over the iron fist has been removed. Bush doesn’t even have to veto legislation, to kill it now. All he need do is issue a signing statement and pass instructions along to his commissars at the affected agency telling them what can and cannot be done.
This is a clear violation of the Separation of Powers, even under the bizarre legal theories of John Yoo. Appointing officials to ensure that government agencies apply the laws in a “politically correct” manner certainly can’t be folded under the cloak of Bush’s authority as “Commander-in-Chief” which is what Yoo based his argument for a unitary executive upon. This is in direct contravention of the Constitution. Congress passes the laws. The President carries them out. He doesn’t get to “decide” which laws to enforce and which to ignore, nor does he have the power to re-write the laws through executive order. Yet that is what this latest step toward an authoritarian Presidency allows.
Impeach him now. We, and the world, can’t wait any longer. He’s too dangerous.
The theory of the Unilateral Executive.
Can you imagine the howls of protest had Clinton (B.) attempted this — or if in future Clinton (H.) should attempt it?
They must believe that they will never leave office.
To answer your examples:
1, Bill wouldn’t need zampolits to mind the store for him, as he actually worked at being President, instead of just ‘working out.’
2, Hillary would be wise, if elected, which I don’t think she will be as: [a, the repubs honestly fear her; and 2, she is not polling well], to attack these zampolits as wasteful expenses and literally purge them from the government.
What is the legal basis for this regulation? The Department programmes are authorized by Congress and line authority rests with the Secretaries and their immediate subordinates. How exactly does a Kommissar determine policy? I suppose by getting people fired who don’t do the Fuhrer’s will; but this is going to be a lot harder with Congressional Committees.
This sounds to me to be the usual sort of half-baked scheme we’ve come to expect from this pathetic administration. One expects Waxman to be on it in a New York minute.
It’s a new ploy.
Codpiece McFlies-a-lot, and his pal ‘Dick’ are on the way down, and this scheme amounts to one last attempt to control the agenda.
This is feeble and fully implementing this fiasco can be stymied by a combination of deceit and non-cooperation.
Congress can react, but we are looking at the last graspings of a failed administration, this can fall down all on its own.
I hope you are right, but I fear what the dying quail of this administration can still do to make things much, much wqrse over the next 24 months.
Can’t Congress specifically refuse to fund these positions?
Also, if it’s a theft of congressional rights, all it takes is one congressperson to tie this up in the courts for the next two years.
And these options can be followed in parallel to any investigatory hearings by Waxman or the like…
I doubt a court would issue a TRO because Congress would be unable at this point to meet this legal standard: “The moving party must demonstrate e either (1 ) a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury or (2) that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships in favor of the movant.” Courts also are often reluctant to involve themselves in what they describe as “political questions” regarding conflicts between the executive and legislative branches.
I don’t doubt that Bush is not only getting advice from Cheney, abu Gonzales, and Yoo, but from the likes of Scalia.
I don’t know what is going to light a fire under Pelosi and Reid and the rest of the Dems. This isn’t just politics anymore. This is the very life of the democracy at stake. According to a recent poll, folks DO WANT Congress TO DO MORE to stop Bush.
When 2009 arrives, I don’t think Bush is going to want to go quietly into that ‘good’ night. The time is NOW. We’re fast losing overtime.
I know. This one really is over the top. It’s ok for the people of the United States to elect a Congress that will pass laws in the people’s interest, but the President ultimately gets to decide what gets done around here, regardless of what the Congress and the people want.
Well, this looks very disturbing indeed. A ghost resurrected from old systems most of us hoped was dead and buried.
As usual, Congress has the ultimate say, unless it gives it away and doesn’t bother to take it back:
Bush has no inherent constitutional authority to appoint anyone to any official position without Senate approval — today, even as Commander in Chief, he can’t promote an officer to the rank of General without a vote of the Senate. Article Two, Section 2, of the United States Constitution defines the powers of the President with respect to the officers of the executive branch:
In short: Any power that Bush may have to appoint officials of any rank is his only so long as Congress lets him keep it.
By the way, regarding the President’s inherent constitutional powers over “his” executive branch, Article Two, Section 2 continues:
Yes, he can “require the opinion” of those Senate-approved Cabinet officers.
And require the opinions “in writing”!
Wow. That doesn’t describe the power of a boss over his employees, does it? It seems that the executive branch was never intended to work for the President. Article Two, Section 3 does, however, demand that President
In this, he is clearly the agent of Congress.
Time to take back some power.