Dems Plot Revenge For Recess Appointments

[sabra]

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/52_106/news/17925-1.html


Democrats May Block Nominees

Angry Senate Democrats are mulling a two-pronged strategy to retaliate against the Bush administration for appointing three controversial figures to key executive branch posts during last week’s recess, including possibly shortening the August recess to no more than 10 days and blocking all future White House nominations.

[NMDemDist2]

1. i hope so! that WH is outa control

:cry:

[wicket]

2. Somebody pop the popcorn!

:popcorn:

[bryant69]

3. Nice neutral language there

Plot revenge? How about plan to maintain their constitutional prerogative? They have the right to advise and consent and Bush has taken that right away from them.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[loudsue]

22. Excellent point! We need to make sure they check their spin at the door.

It IS their constitutional prerogative to pass or withhold passage of these appointments -- appointments that affect all of the citizens in the areas affected.

:thumbsup: Good catch!

:kick::kick::kick:

[Manifestor_of_Light]

23. There is a famous novel called ADVISE AND CONSENT about Congress.

[Canuckistanian]

24. Right you are

This isn't about petty school-boy games.

This is about the enforcement of centuries-old rules and regulations.

[habitual]

4. finally!!! bejesuz krist!

i thought they would've already known to not give bush the 'window of opportunity' of more than 10 days recess.... why didn't they never give him the chance!!!!

[whistle]

5. Fool us once shame on you, fool us twice shame on us!

...At least now the Congressional Democrats have planned, decided and are acting congressional.

[hang a left]

9. I think that they laid a trapl

at least I am hoping anyway.

SOMEBODY tell me they aren't in on the deal... Please, I have a box cutter.

[Lasher]

19. How does that work?

The president can't make recess apointments unless Congress is out for more than 10 days? Is that it? If so, I'll bet they won't ever again be in recess for more than 10 days.

Remember how the Publicans loved their leisure time when they controlled Congress? What was it, show up some time Tuesday and outa there on Thursdays at noon? And how they whined when they found out Democrats believe in working for a living? Ha ha, they'll really squeal if this plays out as I'm speculating here! And they'll have Junior to thank for it. Buh bye, lucrative speaking engagements and book signings when they're getting paid to be in Congress! Buh bye, taxpayer funded 'fact finding' trips with the family to Paris!

[WhiteTara]

21. was this more than 10 days?

I thought this recess was 5 working days? The monkey appointed Fox on the first day out.
:shrug:

[Lasher]

25. OK, I looked it up. There is no 10 day rule.

CRS Report for Congress - Recess Appointments: Frequently Asked Questions updated January 16, 2007

How Long Must the Senate Be in Recess Before a President May Make a Recess Appointment?

The Constitution does not specify the length of time that the Senate must be in recess before the President may make a recess appointment. Over the last century, as shorter recesses have become more commonplace, Attorneys General and the Office of Legal Counsel have offered differing views on this issue. Most recently, in 1993, a Department of Justice brief implied that the President may make a recess appointment during a recess of more than three days. Appointments made during short recesses (less than 30 days), however, have sometimes aroused controversy, and they may involve a political cost for the President. Controversy has been particularly acute in instances where Senators perceive that the President is using the recess appointment process to circumvent the confirmation process for a nominee who is opposed in the Senate.

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RS21308.pdf

So there is a DOJ brief that implies an intrasession (during a recess within a session) recess must have a duration of more than 3 days for appointments to occur. It might therefore be a good tactic for the Senate to refrain from going into recess for a longer period of time. Junior might then refrain from making intrasession recess appointments but in my opinion he would not. I believe this Unitary Executive would instruct the AG to revisit the 1993 brief to conclude the President may make appointments during a recess of any duration whatever. Regardless, Congress should employ the tactic to force his hand.

But he might wait for the upcoming intersession recess. By convention the 110th Congress will go into recess this December between the current (1st) session and the next (2nd), returning in January. It might be possible to also limit this recess to no more than 3 days. But then again maybe not.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

6. its not revenge if you are doing your job. this is their job.

[blm]

15. Absolutely, lioness - this is being spun as revenge when it's their DUTY to perform

their jobs in this manner.

[myrna minx]

20. Exactly. They took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

They are doing their DUTY.

[rodeodance]

7. awh-just a little sweet payback.

[iconoclastic cat]

8. Hell, they should've been doing that anyway. nt

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

10. so when does lieberman come out and say it would be unwise?

[ticapnews]

14. When does Lieberman say he's switching parties

He could easily use this to switch parties, telling the people that it is wrong for the Democrats to seek "revenge" and to prevent that from happening and tearing our Republic asunder, he will save us all by joining with the Republicans who have promised him they will do a better job of governing this time around...

[Lasher]

17. Let him switch. We would have nothing to lose.

And assuming he now has a snowball's chance of ever getting reelected, that would never happen if he ran as a Publican.

[babylonsister]

11. Highly recommended! This thread, and the Dems' actions! nt

[dogday]

12. Angry is good

I am happy to see them do anything that will effect change and put a bug up the administration's ass...

[moondust]

13. Good.

With millions of Murcans to choose from for the relatively inconsequential position of ambassador to Belgium, it's pretty clear that he insisted on this lying bozo to antagonize and frustrate the Dems. If that's the way he wants to play then let the game begin!

[mikelgb]

16. absolutely

no recess long enough for him to envoke

play hardball

[Robbien]

18. Which doesn't help the fact that Dudley is still in charge of regs at the OMB

and Biggs is gunning to kill social security from inside social security office.

These two are very very dangerous and need to be fired.