Is Obama's Cordray Appointment Unprecedented? Not By a Longshot

[Cali_Democrat]

Adam Levin
Posted: 1/6/12 01:11 PM ET

<...>

I read the comments of GOP leaders in the House and Senate (which we all expected) and could only shake my head. I felt like I was reading the script of The Daily Show.

"This is an extraordinary and entirely unprecedented power grab by President Obama that defies centuries of practice and the legal advice of his own Justice Department," House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement. "This action goes beyond the President's authority, and I expect the courts will find the appointment to be illegitimate."

<...>

Actually, fellas, you're mistaken.

Permit me to explain (listen closely, my Republican friends).

When legislation is passed by both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives and signed into law by the President, Senators have blocked recess appointments of unobjectionable nominees in the past, preventing their appointment, though the technicality of a "pro-forma session" (aka the "non-recess recess&quot . For us mortals unschooled in the byzantine rules of the Senate, a "pro forma session" occurs when a couple of Senators "gavel in" and "gavel out" but conduct no business.

<...>

Perhaps most importantly, the entire purpose of the recess appointments clause in article 2 cannot be defeated by the sham of a "pro-forma session," which is designed strictly to prevent that which the Constitution explicitly authorizes, and which ensures something that would've been quite objectionable to the founding fathers -- surely they would not have wanted a "tyranny of the minority," anymore than a "tyranny of the majority," or for that matter, anymore than they, or any American, would want a tyranny of any kind.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-levin/obama-cordray_b_1189484.html

[unblock]

1. i think the argument that it's unprecedented is that congress is IN, not BETWEEN pro formas

the usual tactic is to have pro forma sessions that last mere minutes (gavel in/gavel out) about every week so there's never a 10-day recess, and the president has traditionally avoided recess appointments during a less than 10 day recess.

THIS time, republicans are saying that congress is not gavelling out. they're claiming that they're still in session, even though there's no business being conducted on the floor (only committee work).

so the question is, is congress in recess when they're not conducting any floor business, or are they in recess only when they state that they're in recess?

personally, i think the answer has to be that they're in recess when they're not conducting business, regardless of whether or not they claim to be in session. otherwise, levin's point stands, that all they're doing is taking a constitutional presidential power away.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

2. Republicans can perpetrate some of the worst abuses of power without a fig leaf of remorse

including things like indefinite detention without charges/trial, torture, illegal wiretapping, etc. yet the instant a Democrat tries to implement health care reform or create a new consumer watchdog agency, the Republicans gasp and faint in outrage at the Democrats' "Chicago-style politics" and socialist tyranny!