Guest EXPAT Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 A much needed organization gets its leader (despite the Senate Republican blocking it). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-cordray/standing-up-for-consumers_b_1184002.html Quote
Members MsGuy Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 A much needed organization gets its leader (despite the Senate Republican blocking it). Maybe, maybe not. This is a recess appointment of murky constitutionality. The President is attempting to evade the constitutional requirement that the principal officers of US agencies serve with the 'advice and consent' of the Senate. The Senate is attempting to block his power to make recess appointments by means of sham sessions that are themselves of doubtful constitutional efficacy. It's just one more example of the day to day mechanisms of our government seizing up under the pressure of excessive partisanship. Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 Maybe, maybe not. This is a recess appointment of murky constitutionality. The President is attempting to evade the constitutional requirement that the principal officers of US agencies serve with the 'advice and consent' of the Senate. The Senate is attempting to block his power to make recess appointments by means of sham sessions that are themselves of doubtful constitutional efficacy. It's just one more example of the day to day mechanisms of our government seizing up under the pressure of excessive partisanship. Despite all of that, he needed to get this organization moving to protect consumers from insane corporate greed. Quote
Members MsGuy Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 And we will find out whether POTUS was successful after some regulated finantial institution ( ) challenges one of the guy's actions in Federal Court. Say two, maybe three, years? Quote
Members Lucky Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 A recess appointment is only good for one year. Quote
Members MsGuy Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 A recess appointment is only good for one year. Say EZ Finance falls afoul of some niggling regulation about foisting negatively amortized 2nd mortages with a balloon payment on unsophisticated borrowers: would you expect a challenge in the Federal Courts to said regulation avering the agency did not have the authority to issue the regulation because it's head was acting unlawfully to be finally adjudicated in less than two years? (Hell of a sentence, eh? ) ---- And, technically, the appointment is good (or in the case sub judice, maybe not so good) until the adjournment of the following session of Congress. Quote
BiBottomBoy Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 I, for one, am happy Obama is done trying to placate congress and is finally saying 'fuck this shit. I'm going to write executive orders." Quote
Members RA1 Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 Don't forget that executive orders are somewhat like line item vetos (which we don't have but which are often proposed) in that while one might like them with the preferred actions of a sitting President, one might not like them with another. Just a variation on be careful what you wish for. Best regards, RA1 Quote
BiBottomBoy Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 We had eight years of a president abusing his powers to do things I consider shitty. I think it's only fair we do the same thing to the other side. Quote
Members TampaYankee Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 At least it gets the ball rolling. As for a SCOTUS challenge, that assumes the Court will choose to hear it. That is far from a forgone conclusion, IMO. Quote
BiBottomBoy Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 And by the time they do hear it the makeup of the court could be very different. Quote
Members Lucky Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 The job rightfully belonged to Elizabeth Warren, but Obama did not have the balls to support the woman who created the whole thing. Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted January 5, 2012 Posted January 5, 2012 The job rightfully belonged to Elizabeth Warren, but Obama did not have the balls to support the woman who created the whole thing. I think you are right, but her time now is better spent beating Scott Brown for the Senate. Quote
Members Lucky Posted January 5, 2012 Members Posted January 5, 2012 I think you are right, but her time now is better spent beating Scott Brown for the Senate. Yes, and I hope that she does beat him. You and I are agreeing so much now. Is it the air? Quote
BiBottomBoy Posted January 6, 2012 Posted January 6, 2012 I think she's going to seriously win that race. People are bitter about what happened after they elected lunatics two years ago. Quote
Members Lucky Posted January 6, 2012 Members Posted January 6, 2012 We have this post in the Pub and no one died from it not being in the Politics forum! Yeah!! Quote
Members JKane Posted January 8, 2012 Members Posted January 8, 2012 I love me some Elizabeth Warren. Maybe after 4 years as senator she could run for Pres? I also hope Al Franken keeps his seat. Quote
