It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Congress passed law to end "Advice and consent of the Senate". It now goes to the President

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 06:46 PM
link   
It looks like the president is gonna have a whole lot of more power soon; Congress passed S.679 which will allow the president to make appointments without the advice or consent of the Senate. The bill passed in the Democrat controlled Senate last year. Its passage by the Congress means it now goes before the president for his signature.


House Passes Bill Eliminating Senate Approval of Presidential Appointments

By a vote of 261-116, the House of Representatives passed a bill rewriting Article II of the Constitution and divesting the Senate of the power to accept or reject the appointment of many presidential nominees.

"Important positions will be filled faster, government agencies will be more capable of offering valuable services to their constituents, and the overall confirmation process will be more efficient,” said Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Dozens of key management positions in the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Commerce, and Homeland Security (including the treasurer of the United States, the deputy administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, the director of the Office for Domestic Preparedness, and the assistant administrator of FEMA) will now be filled by presidential edict, without the need of the “advice and consent” of the Senate, a phrase specifically removed from the process in the text of the bill.

Despite a last-minute attempt by some House leaders to put the measure to a voice vote, thus allowing members to vote in favor of the legislation without being listed on the record, a roll call vote was taken, and the name of every congressman who voted to unconstitutionally neuter the legislative branch is listed.

The New American

Its not as bad as it looks, the bill lists the only positions in which this exemption will take place so its not like they've given away the Supreme Court or key cabinet appointments to the president's free reign. Still, they've given him a REALLY long list of appointments he can make with no checks on his power. Who is to doubt that the list won't get progressively longer as the years go by?

About a third of Republicans crossed the aisles to vote this in. Does this mean they think their guy is a shoe in for the next election or is it a show or real bipartisanship in an attempt to cut through government red tape?


edit on 8/4/12 by FortAnthem because:
_________




posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   




In a land of czars...not surprising...



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


For die hard partisans , this is a nightmare.

For the rest of us ..... meh.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   


About a third of Republicans crossed the aisles to vote this in.

Seems like a lot of traitors to the constitution are in the same house.

And I thought so many people have declared the US is NOT under a Dictatorship rule.

Sure looks like one from this side of the fence. But just fancy up the lingo and say it's all for the greater good and anything will be accepted by the people.

I find myself getting angrier by the day and it used to be against those that would suppress the people but lately it seems that it's the people pi$$ing me off even more so for not doing anything about it.

It's your Country Americans...Use it or lose it.

Peace


edit on 4-8-2012 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   
The way things are going, soon enough it will be the citizens of America who will require another country to come in and "liberate" us...

American citizens are the ones needing "liberation" any more.

What a mess things are any more.



edit on 4-8-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by HangTheTraitors
 


Well , dont even bother looking this way , we`re tired of carrying your lazy ass.
2nd



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeEnglishArmy
reply to post by HangTheTraitors
 


Well , dont even bother looking this way , we`re tired of carrying your lazy ass.
2nd


Thats funny. Whom are you who is "carrying us"?

I am curious.
edit on 4-8-2012 by HangTheTraitors because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Well, it would seem King Barry and his buddy Harry have spoken. The Senators who went for this should be thrown out. Without exception and 100%.

I just read down the list of who isn't covered now and it's a whole wish list of political points mixed with areas where there are damn good reasons for oversight and confirmation.

This is one of the only OFFICIAL duties of the United States Senate. Most of what they do is not what they are there to do, by the papers that define their existence. THIS, however, IS among the legally required things. So they willingly hand-of their legal obligation? Nice..


Hey, for anyone on the left who is happy or anyone seeing it as partisan. If Obama having this power is good, how about Romney? Or the Republican who WILL come to power eventually. It always swings both directions. BAD ... Jeeze.. are they leaving anything of the Constitution or have the attacks seemingly gone into warp speed?? This was just an outright sell-out.

edit on 4-8-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   
I was born a Democrat , after shaking the higher learning I became a Republican. After Majoring in history I became Independent. What may or may not have been enlightened to is the the ever increasing totalitarian stance we have taken, if you look at a clock imagine 6 as middle of the road. and 12 as dictatorship. The farther you go left or right you come out the other side.

Every Presidential term since the Revolution, whether by who controls the congress, Senate, Supreme court, or President. Has increased powers to the president like Dictator. Its time we realized they label both sides so we fight the other. Americans need an enemy and something to entertain us.

A puppet master with a R puppet on one hand and D puppet on the other. And it has the puppets fight each other from behind the curtain. Time to realize no matter who is in office they are against the People. D or R or I.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


I have made my view on the situation known already, I am just waiting for everybody else to wake up to reality. This cycle has never once started and ended any way than the bad way, granted we are the only country like ours that has tried it the way we are trying it, but the direction seems to fllow a well established pattern of stead overstepping until it is too late to go back. Then there is only one choice, lord have mercy on us .



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


This country and Constitution is DONE! We have been gutted! Lock and load is about all we have left, unless we allow them to take our guns.............................



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
This is not the first time Congress has delegated their Constitutionally mandated authority. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution authorizes, or mandates Congress with the authority to coin and regulated money. However, in 1913 Congress delegated that authority to the Federal Reserve. To the best of my knowledge no one has ever either challenged, or successfully challenged the Constitutionality of the Federal Reserve. However, The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals did rule in Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982) that the Federal Reserve were privately owned banks, which seems to mean that they are indeed unconstitutional.

Of course, the narrow scope of private banks is not the Constitutional challenge of delegation. Does Congress have the right to delegate their Constitutionally authorized power seems to be the question here.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 

Further than that, do they have the authority to do so in a way that fundamentally changes the balance of power between the branches and the checks/balances which keep our system even half way decent.

I believe the Government operates on the functionaries and managers as much or more than the President. He's just Pappa smurf. This opens such a wide range of positions now totally in the hands of the President without opportunity to even comment, that it changes the balance of power in a core way. It really does, IMO.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 

...This opens such a wide range of positions now totally in the hands of the President without opportunity to even comment...



or investigate

wait till you see who's going to be the new czars



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:13 PM
link   
I was going to make a list of them all but there's so many that I don't even know how the senate was supposed to function every four years spending time debating which ones should and shouldn't be appointed. I don't know whether to be upset at the size of government or that so many meaningless positions required senate approval.

Go through the list yourself and tell me how important these positions are and why they require a senate vote.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   
We need a constitutional amendment that congress must have a much better approval rating before they can make any changes to the constitution. Just about every law they comes up with blows.

I also support a law that would call for mandatory elections for congress when they go below a certain approval rating.


edit on 4-8-2012 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
While I am still going through the law presented, as it stands, certain positions are delegated, by law, to Heads of Departments. My position (yes I am a government employee; think what you will) falls under the executive and I am technically an "Officer of the United States of America", but to a lessor extent. This is typically what these laws are passed for, but I will read through to offer any opinion if it is otherwise.

Article II, Section 2 states in full: (emphasis added)

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.


This law is not entirely as "dangerous" as the title makes it out to be.

PS Links pointed it out as I was editing that this is well within the powers of Congress to delegate BY LAW the lessor positions within Government.
edit on 4-8-2012 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I just read down the list of who isn't covered now and it's a whole wish list of political points mixed with areas where there are damn good reasons for oversight and confirmation.


Can you provide some examples of 'damn good reasons for oversight and confirmation'? Just one or two will do.

Also, for anyone curious, Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2:

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.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well, it would seem King Barry and his buddy Harry have spoken. The Senators who went for this should be thrown out. Without exception and 100%.



For exercising an enumerated power? Article II, Section 2 -- as pointed out, give authority to delegate by law to the President, Courts and Heads of Departments. This is what this bill and the ones before this is doing.

It isn't to say that somewhere buried deep in this there are some questionable delegations, but Congress hasn't done anything nearly "fringe" or transferred any powers they already have the power to do so.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Can he sack people to?
so he can now take over goverment totaly with HIS people.

this is a BIG play in the end game.

Just like a Rabbit in the road!
edit on 4-8-2012 by buddha because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join