Executive Order Creates Political Officers for all US Regulatory Agencies

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I'm surprised that the executive branch didn't have more control over these regulatory agencies before this directive.

Regulatory agencies have traditionally been somewhat separated from direct executive control. More so than cabinet depts, less so than Crown corps (or whatever you guys call stuff like Amtrak)

I'm against most forms of increased direct oversight of the executive.

[Kuciwalker]

I'm against most forms of increased direct oversight of the executive.

I'm all for increased oversight of the executive god knows we need it.

[KrazyHorse]

of=by in my world.

[Drake Tungsten]

I don't really know how I feel on the subject. I'm not exactly thrilled by the expansion of executive power, but the idea of the unelected bureaucracy at these agencies operating largely without oversight doesn't sit well with me, either.

[KrazyHorse]

There is judicial oversight, as Ogie mentioned, to ensure that they do not interpret the law in a manner which directly contravenes the law.

Most career bureaucrats are less interested in putting their own political bend on things than they are in keeping their heads out of the guillotine. There are not many examples I'm aware of where a regulatory agency's actions are seriously out of synch with the legislature's intentions in crafting legislation. I have a feeling that if the executive has greater control over the bureaucracy then you will see more of them.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
There is judicial oversight, as Ogie mentioned, to ensure that they do not interpret the law in a manner which directly contravenes the law.

Most career bureaucrats are less interested in putting their own political bend on things than they are in keeping their heads out of the guillotine. There are not many examples I'm aware of where a regulatory agency's actions are seriously out of synch with the legislature's intentions in crafting legislation. I have a feeling that if the executive has greater control over the bureaucracy then you will see more of them.

Most career bureaucrats are apolitical and extremely risk averse. To that end any legal interpretation of legislation is likely going to be the most comprehensive and all inclusive form of regulation to limit career ending contravening decisions. So strictly speaking they will not contravene legislation but will instead more likely expand the scope and interpretation beyonds it original intent. Some oversight as a consequence is absolutely required.

Should that oversight be simply based upon party affiliation is another kettle of fish completely.

[Sava]

It's times like these when I start to think the second amendment is a very good thing.

[Drake Tungsten]

Second Amendment

Sava

[Sava]

That may be a frivolous remark on my part, but what is going to happen if things continue on the path that they are continuing?

I'm sorry, but whether or not one agrees with certain policies or not, I think most can agree that there is a disturbing trend taking place. Executive power is clearly expanding, and these are precedents that are being set that won't simply go away when Bush leaves office.

I was watching MSNBC last night, and I thought it was very odd that I found myself agreeing with almost everything Pat Buchanan (oh noes, teh mexicans are coming ) was saying about Congress needing to assert it's power to the President. Congress is the first branch of government mentioned in the Constitution, not the executive branch. Congress has the ability to declare war, the power of the purse, the power to legislate, etc...

Bush is just one douche. He'll be gone soon enough. But the office of the President will remain. I'm concerned about the amount of power that has been afforded to that office just within the last six years. When is it going to stop? Is Congress going to restore proper balance? Are the people going to have to do it?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Ebb and flow of executive power. Executive power has been on the wane for most of peace time from Nixon until recently. Wartime always accompanies an executive expansion of powers. I suspect the accompanying hand wringing/war weariness we see now will likely check future executive expansions of powers.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Executive power has been on the expansion since the New Deal.

Fixed.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I'm surprised that the executive branch didn't have more control over these regulatory agencies before this directive.

Maybe over the executive functions, but not over their rule making functions.

[DinoDoc]

Shouldn't the law making functions be under say the legistlative branch then?

[Zkribbler]

The legislature set up the agencies and granted them "rule making" powers so that they can use their expertise to fill out statutory schemes.

[DinoDoc]

And where in the Constitution does it allow the Congress to abdicate its responsibility in such a way?