Obama makes recess appointment, except Congress isn't in recess...

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#1
Just fucking great. Now I guess the President gets to decide what "recess" means.

President Obama Appoints Consumer Watchdog, Prompting Threats of Lawsuit
Published January 04, 2012
| Associated Press
Print Email Share Comments

AP
July 18, 2011: President Obama announces the nomination of former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray to serve as the first director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
In a defiant display of presidential power, President Barack Obama on Wednesday named a new U.S. chief consumer watchdog, outraging Republicans who warn the president he'll face a fight in court over the decision.
"Today I'm appointing Richard (Cordray) as America's consumer watchdog. And that means he'll be in charge of one thing: looking out for the best interests of American consumers," Obama said in a speech in a Cleveland suburb. "His job will be to protect families like yours from the abuses of the financial industry."
Cordray's nomination had been blocked by Senate Republicans because they believe the consumer agency he would head is too powerful and unaccountable. So Obama made a recess appointment -- essentially declaring that the short off-and-on sessions that the Senate has held are just a sham intended to block him.
In fact, the Democrats started the practice in the Senate when George W. Bush was president.
The Senate's top Republican, Mitch McConnell, is accusing Obama of a power grab that "arrogantly circumvented the American people."
House Speaker John Boehner says Obama "would rather trample our system of separation of powers than work with Republicans to move the country forward." He said he expects the courts to find the appointment to be "illegitimate."
With a director in place, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau can start overseeing the mortgage companies, payday lenders, debt collectors and other financial companies often blamed for practices that helped tank the economy.
Though the move enraged Republicans, Democrats praised the president's bravado.
"With Richard Cordray leading the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Americans will finally get the consumer protections they deserve," said Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.
"Mr. Cordray is eminently qualified for the job, as even my Senate Republican colleagues have acknowledged. ... It's disappointing that Senate Republicans denied him an up-or-down vote, especially when it's clear he had the support of a majority of the Senate," he continued.
According to the Constitution, no chamber can take a break longer than three days without the consent of the other chamber. To avoid recess appointments, Republicans objected to an official recess and the Legislature went into pro-forma sessions where one lawmaker gavels in and gavels out every third day.
The belief was that this keeps the president from making recess appointments. But the White House concluded it had the authority, and is getting its biggest bang for the buck by doing it between the sessions. That way, Cordray appointment won't expire until Jan. 3, 2014.
Congress has no recourse to stop the president's action though a Republican leadership aide told Fox News that it's likely an organization affected by the Consumer Financial Protection Board may sue right away.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...hdog-while-congress-is-at-home/#ixzz1iWIFNvjn
 

Motor Head

HIGHWAY TRASH REMOVAL
Jan 23, 2006
10,385
419
243
Land of hicks and rubes.
#2
Please Jeeezos, one medium sized meteorite that can simply corrrect what is wrong with this country....Washington DC.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,279
6,866
568
Nothern VA
#4
I can't imagine why anyone would even want to join Congress out on the playground. He should be lucky to have the jungle gym to himself and not have to share with those grade repeating bullies.
 

ShooterMcGavin

Go back to your shanties.
May 25, 2005
18,029
1,380
643
#5
It's a Fox News article. Slanted right. And also a lie. Never happened. Fox News makes things up.

:trollol:
 

CousinDave

Registered User
Dec 11, 2007
25,297
198
393
Ohio
#7
The POTUS has this power to make recess appointments, if the Congress dosen't like it, then they can cut off funding for this agency
 

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#8
The POTUS has this power to make recess appointments, if the Congress dosen't like it, then they can cut off funding for this agency
Did you not get the title of the thread? Congress is not in recess. The Senate has been meeting every three days or so just to avoid being "in recess" because they knew Obama would appoint this guy despite the fact that the Senate (which is democrat controlled) was going to block his nomination. The precedent has been that the President only makes recess appointments if Congress is out for more than 10 days. If this stands, the President could start making appointments every weekend on the allegation that a weekend = a recess.
 

The Godfather

Spark it up for The Godfather and say!!!!!
May 9, 2007
11,256
10
163
#10
Obama bypasses Senate to fill labor board posts

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama recess-appointed three members to the National Labor Relations Board on Wednesday, bypassing fierce opposition from Republicans who claim the agency has leaned too far in favor of unions.

The appointments came just hours after Obama used a similar move to install former Ohio Atty. Gen. Richard Cordray to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-01-04-15-24-18

 

Josh_R

Registered User
Jan 29, 2005
5,847
458
578
Akron, Ohio
#11
It wasn't just one appointment, he appointed four positions (3 to the NLRB, yippie).
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/obama-tempts-fight-over-recess-appointments/
Obama Tempts Fight Over Recess Appointments
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
President Obama’s decision on Wednesday to grant recess appointments to four officials — even though the Senate contends that it is not in recess — was an unprecedented legal step that brought into sharper focus a recent bipartisan struggle over presidential power.

In early 2007, shortly after Democrats took control of the Senate, President George W. Bush made several recess appointments. But in November 2007, Senate Democrats did not formally recess before going home for Thanksgiving. Instead, they stayed in “pro forma” session, sending a member into the chamber every three days to bang the gavel.

Senate Democrats repeated the move during breaks for the rest of Mr. Bush’s presidency, and Mr. Bush did not try to make any further recess appointments. Under President Obama, Republicans – despite being a minority in the Senate — turned the tables by also keeping the chamber in pro forma session.

The development raised the prospect that Congress had found a way to permanently take away the power of presidents of either party to make recess appointments. By making the four appointments this week – Richard Cordray as director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and three members of the National Labor Relations Board — the administration is challenging that tactic.

“Can the Senate, through form, render a constitutional power of the executive obsolete?” Kathryn Ruemmler, Mr. Obama’s White House Counsel, said in an interview. “Our view is that the answer to that question is clearly no.”

But the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, denounced the move, saying that Mr. Obama had “arrogantly circumvented the American people” and endangered “the Congress’s role in providing a check on the excesses of the executive branch.”

The question of whether Congress can block a president from making recess appointments by staying in pro forma session turns on what counts as a recess — and who gets to decide, legal specialists say.

Under a “formalist” view, the Senate is in session whenever it says it is in session – even if the chamber is empty most of the time and all the senators are in their home states. If that view is correct, then Mr. Obama’s appointments on Wednesday were constitutionally invalid.

Under a “functional” view, the Senate is in recess if its members are unavailable to perform the tasks the Constitution assigns to them – like deciding whether to consent to the appointment of a presidential nominee.

The administration’s legal team has adopted the second view – thereby freeing Mr. Obama to make the recess appointments. But several legal questions were raised by the move.

For example, under longstanding practice, presidents have not made recess appointments when Congress has been out of town for fewer than 10 days. The limit prevents presidents from using a brief period in which senators are not conducting business – such as a long weekend — to circumvent the confirmation process.

Part of the Senate’s “pro forma” session tactic has been to send a member into the chamber every three days to bang the gavel, ostensibly breaking up lengthy recesses into a series of three-day ones. In his statement attacking Mr. Obama’s move, Mr. McConnell centered his criticism on the premise that the White House had broken with that limit.

“This recess appointment represents a sharp departure from a long-standing precedent that has limited the president to recess appointments only when the Senate is in a recess of 10 days or longer,” he said.

Ms. Ruemmler, however, argued that sending a senator into the chamber every three days was not meaningful because the Senate had made clear that it was not conducting any business during those brief appearances. In reality, she contended, the Senate is on recess for several weeks, a break that will end when its members return to Washington later this month.

“The president has recess authority under the Constitution so he can continue to fulfill his constitutional function — which is to run the government — when the Senate is unavailable to fulfill its function,” Ms. Ruemmler said, “and it currently is unavailable despite the fact that it is in a ‘pro forma’ session’ for 30 seconds every three days.”

Although courts normally avoid ruling on where the line falls in the spectrum of power between the executive branch and the legislative branch, the Obama administration’s step is likely to face judicial scrutiny. Future regulatory decisions made by the consumer agency and the labor board could be challenged in court by people and businesses affected by them, and such lawsuits could turn in part on whether the recess appointments were valid.

The timing could raise another issue as well: Under the Constitution, an official who receives a recess appointment normally serves until the end of the following session of Congress. That means that Mr. Cordray, for example, would serve until the end of 2013 — even if Mr. Obama loses the 2012 election. Under the statute, a president may remove the head of the consumer agency only for cause, such as “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”

Proponents of presidential power have sometimes challenged such statutory limitations on a president’s discretion to remove an executive branch official, so if a Republican takes over the White House in 2013 and wants to fire Mr. Cordray, it could set up a new round of litigation over the separation of powers.

Ms. Ruemmler declined to say whether the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel had produced a memorandum saying that it was valid for Mr. Obama to make the recess appointments. The Office of Legal Counsel considered the question of pro forma sessions and recess appointments late in the Bush administration, but did not make public any conclusions.

Still, two top lawyers from the Office of Legal Counsel in Mr. Bush’s second term, Stephen Bradbury and John Elwood, published an op-ed in The Washington Post in October 2010 saying that they believed pro forma sessions were invalid as a way to prevent presidents from making recess appointments. Mr. Elwood expanded on that analysis in a lengthy blog posting on Wednesday.
BINGO:
Under the Constitution, an official who receives a recess appointment normally serves until the end of the following session of Congress. That means that Mr. Cordray, for example, would serve until the end of 2013 — even if Mr. Obama loses the 2012 election. Under the statute, a president may remove the head of the consumer agency only for cause, such as “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
This is what it is all about. He is packing the Executive Branch with people that the Senate would never approve knowing that they would stay in office after he is gone.
 

CousinDave

Registered User
Dec 11, 2007
25,297
198
393
Ohio
#12
Did you not get the title of the thread? Congress is not in recess. The Senate has been meeting every three days or so just to avoid being "in recess" because they knew Obama would appoint this guy despite the fact that the Senate (which is democrat controlled) was going to block his nomination. The precedent has been that the President only makes recess appointments if Congress is out for more than 10 days. If this stands, the President could start making appointments every weekend on the allegation that a weekend = a recess.


Well then they're going to fight over whether the Senate was in recess or not

I really think Little Barry wins this one

We'll see what the Congress does, if its a violation of the separation of powers, then this is an impeachable offense
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
17,998
5,393
838
Wilmington, NC
#14
Sure, we can survive another 4 years of this dope. :rolleyes: Ya know, he pulls shit like this, and yet some wonder why businesses still aren't hiring.

I read this story yesterday on HuffPo (don't worry, I gave my browser a good scrub down after), and I was surprised how many of their readers were just bashing the crap out of Obama. And the story wasn't even infiltrated by a bunch of righties...they were mostly long time HuffPo posters. But of course, there are lefties that are pointing out that Obama has not made nearly as many recess appointments as previous Presidents. Of course, those Presidents actually waited until, ya know, Congress was in recess.

With the way labor unions are cheering these appointments, especially Cordray...and Obama saying Cordray will do a fine job overseeing mortgage lenders, payday lenders, debt collectors, and other financial companies...kinda makes me a bit nervous.
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Sep 15, 2004
46,810
6,921
763
F.U.B.A.R
#15
How many Impeachable offenses has the big Zero racked up this time... "whaa"
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#16
Does anyone else want to make the bullshit claim that "they're all the same" yet again? Because it's really starting to get fucking old.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#17
Hasn't Huffington issued the one sheet yet? I know someone's gotta have a better excuse for this than making up stories about Rick Santorum.
 

Begbie

Wackbag Generalissimo
Jul 21, 2003
17,998
5,393
838
Wilmington, NC
#19

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#21
Wow, how hard is it for people to understand that CONGRESS IS NOT IN RECESS? I know I'm expecting a lot from libtards, but simple reading skills? That's too much now?
 

Owenay

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed...
May 10, 2007
3,666
248
358
Bizarro World
#24
Wow, how hard is it for people to understand that CONGRESS IS NOT IN RECESS? I know I'm expecting a lot from libtards, but simple reading skills? That's too much now?
It was a bold move the the POTUS... :icon_roll

I'm a shoe on the other foot kinda guy. If roles were reversed and we had a President McCain or a President Romney or whoever coupled with a Democrat House and a Republican Senate and that R POTUS believed he knew what was best for the country, but the Ds in Congress disagreed and then said R POTUS went out did what he wanted anyway the D's would all be PISSED and it would be THE only story on the news. And then if the R POTUS went out and said that it's his duty to do what he thinks is best even if the other branches of government didn't agree, the Ds and the media would be screaming the words "DICTATOR!" and "EMPEACHMENT" at the tops of their lungs. This is hypocrisy at it's most obvious. And if any leftist disagrees with this you're a liar plain and simple.
 

Neckbeard

I'm Team Piggy!
Donator
Oct 26, 2011
24,912
15,302
303
#25
Recess, only class that nigga passed. SHOW US THE TRANSCRIPTS OBUMMER.

:p