| September 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | ||
According to a variety of reports, Obama's czars are in charge of spending the $780 billion in the stimulus package.
From Newsweek, re: Van Jones:
What Green Jobs?
Washington is spending $60 billion to create the careers of the future, but not a single green job yet exists. Obama's 'green czar' explains.President Obama devoted nearly $60 billion of his stimulus package to building a new green-based economy rich in renewable energy and strategies to cut carbon. But despite the price tag, not one green job yet exists.
Wikipedia lists Earl E. Devaney as "Stimulus Accountability Czar, Stimulus Oversight Czar". From the Washington Post, re: Devaney:
President Obama plans to announce Monday that he wants a former Secret Service agent who helped expose lobbying corruption at the Interior Department to oversee the $787 billion economic stimulus plan, an administration official said Sunday.
Per Politico, the TARP czar is Herb Allison. Allison appears to share responsibility with Devaney, in overseeing the $787 billion stimulus. Per Reuters:
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Obama administration is expected to name Fannie Mae Chief Executive Herb Allison to head the U.S. government's $700 billion financial rescue program, a source familiar with the matter said on Monday.
Isn't it a subversion of our Constitution for Obama to hand oversight of $787 billion of taxpayer money over to unelected czars who report to him personally?
#21. What provision of the Constitution is it that bars the President from appointing assistants and advisors?
2. Weren'tt the two people you mentioned, Daveney and Allison, confirmed by the Senate?
#31. The post does not object to the President appointing advisors; it objects to the President handing oversight of $780 billion of taxpayer money over to people who report only to him.
2. Allison was confirmed; Daveney and Van Jones were not.
#41. Actually, Mr. Daveney is in a Senate-confirmed inspector general position, is fully accountable to congress and has testified before Congress.
2. I can't see why some guy who is a special assistant to an advisory council would ever be subject to Senate confirmation.
3. It is odd that the appointment of various assistant flunkeys is seen as a threat to our system of government, while no one objects to the President's appointment of people having real, actual power, such as the Chief of Staff. Why is the President's power to appoint an advisor on green jobs to the Council on Environmental Quality more troubling than his power to appoint Rahm Emanuel? (Or, depending on the administration, Karl Rove or Andrew Card?) Did Van Jones have more power than Karl Rove?
4. No one has yet identified the provision of the Consitution (or any statute that makes any of ths illegal.) Is there any?
#5Actually, Mr. Daveney is in a Senate-confirmed
Can you provide a link to confirm this?
#6Mr. Devaney is a Senate-Confirmed Inspector General assigned to the Department of Labor. A former police officer and Secret Service agent, h was reviewed and confirmed by the Senate in 1999.
#7My links were dropped from the last post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Devaney
I note that he has already testified before Congressional Committees exercizing their oversight responsibility over the recovery program. See, for example,
http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/040209Devaney.pdf
#8Yes, per your link, Devaney was confirmed by the Senate as Inspector General for the United States Department of the Interior. The U.S. Dept. of Interior has no business spending $780 billion in stimulus funds. Per Wikipedia:
The United States Department of the Interior (DOI) is the United States federal executive department of the U.S. government responsible for the management and conservation of most federal land and the administration of programs relating to Native Americans, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians, and to insular areas of the United States.
It is not in his capacity of Inspector General for the United States Department of the Interior, that Devaney is overseeing this stimulus spending.
Devaney has been Inspector General for the United States Department of the Interior since 1999, again per your link. Obama appointed Devaney as a czar to oversee stimulus spending, earlier this year.
#91. Mr. Deveney is a dedicated career government executive who whas reviewed and confirmed by the Senate. If he were a secret bolshi spy for the North Koreans, or whatever, they had every opportunity to ferret that out.
2. The Department of the Interior is not "spending $780 billion in stimulus funds," as you incorrectly assert, but it is spending many billions of such funds. They are being used in landscape restoration, roads, trails, mine improvements and other job-intensive projects that are contributing to the recovery. Anyone can review the progress at recovery.gov
3. As an expert in combatting waste, fraud and abuse, it makes perfect sense to me that Mr. Deveney be detailed to insure the stimulus funds are spent in the manner in which they were intended. And no one can reasonably argue that he is not "accountable" or subject to oversight, since he has already testified twice to Congressional oversight committees.
4. Of course, all of this is perfectly legal and constitutional. No one has cited any provision of any law or of the Constitution that suggests otherwise.
#102. The Department of the Interior is not "spending $780 billion in stimulus funds," as you incorrectly assert,
I did not assert that. I asserted:
It is not in his capacity of Inspector General for the United States Department of the Interior, that Devaney is overseeing this stimulus spending.
It appears to be a subversion of the Constitution for Obama to seize control, through his czars, of $780 billion of public funds to spend as he directs.
#11This is now getting really loopy as your argument becomes more and more attenuated. Nothing is being "seized," through "czars" or anyone else. The stimulus funds, which independant economists have confirmed are helping our economy recover, are being properly spent according to detailed Congressional specifications. We are lucky to have dedicated government employee like Mr. Deveney to make sure the money is not misused. Anyone who wishes to deal with reality rather than bizarro conspiracy claims and potted constitutional theories can receive a wealth of detail on the use of the stimulus funds at the incredibly helpful website recovery.gov.
#12Nothing is being "seized," through "czars" or anyone else.
You do not deny that Devaney has oversight of the $780 billion, nor that in this capacity he reports directly to Obama. Can you cite a previous time in American history when a President had direct oversight of the spending of $780 billion through an official he appointed, and who reports directly to him?
#13Sure - the Department of Defense. appropriated funds get spent all the time. The stimulus funds have been specifically designated by Congress. Mr. Deveney, like all Inspectors General, is there to make sure that no one robs the till. He, the President, and the directors of the TARP program report on the expenditures to Congress. Mr. Deveney has already testified twice before congerssional oversight committees. If you wish to know where just about every penny of stimulus money is going, take a look at recovery.gov.
By the way, still no citation to any statute, to any portion of the constitution or to any caselaw in 200 years of jurisprudence to support the raving assertion that any of this is illegal or unconstitutional.
#14Sure - the Department of Defense
That's a reasonable point. The President is Commander-in-Chief of the military.
However, it is a good example for my point too. The entire 2007 budget of the DoD is $780 billion. Via the stimulus bill, Obama has seized control of an amount of money equivalent to the entire annual DoD budget. It is unprecedented for the President to have direct oversight of such an amount for a non-military purpose.
By the way, still no citation to any statute, to any portion of the constitution or to any caselaw in 200 years of jurisprudence to support the raving assertion that any of this is illegal or unconstitutional.
I did not state that it was illegal or unconstitutional; I stated that it is a subversion of the Constitution. The Constitution intends for Congress to allocate public funds - not for the President to exert personal control over 3/4 of a trillion dollars of public funds.
Per MSN Encarta:
sub·ver·sion
noun
Definition:
1. activity undermining government: an action, plan, or activity intended to undermine or overthrow a government or other institution
2. overthrow of something: the destruction or ruining of something
I can't think of much that Obama has done that has not subverted our Constitution...wasn't that his platform? He was going to remake America?
Best regards,
Gail S
http://backyardfence.wordpress.com/conservative-action-plan