Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Obama and Schumer Try to Trample Constitution (Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011)

Right when Liberals think we aren't paying attention due to the death of Osama Bin Laden, here comes another power grab from the Left. Once again that pesky Constitution and the checks and balances within is getting in the way of Obama creating his socialist utopia. The bill is called the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011. I recommend you read it, but in a nutshell, it lists numerous offices where are appointed by the President and removes the necessity of Senate confirmation to install these individuals. For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, that means the President can simply appoint people to high office without approval of the Senate.

Before I begin to rip this piece of legislation to shreds, let me give you the Constitution on the subject:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. (1)

That's right, friends, the President is required by the Constitution to receive a super majority of the Senate's approval before installing appointees. Yet the President, with the willing support of Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), wants to remove that check. This is a blatant power grab from the Left. It is 100% Unconstitutional and must be stopped.

I can hear my six or so Liberal readers now: "Read the's JUST assistant level appointees." That line may work on some, but it doesn't work on me. "It's just" is the Liberal way of sneaking in a concept into legal circles before expanding. "It's just" always ends up to be a starter for more intrusion into our lives.

It was "just" a ban on smoking in restaurants in New York State, too, when the Clean Indoor Air Act was passed into law. I remember back in 2003 when the law was enacted, telling many, many people that it was privately owned property and that the government had no more right to stop the LEGAL activity of smoking in a privately owned restaurant because it was open to the public than it had the right to tell you that you could not smoke in your own home. Far too many non-smokers from all sides of the isle bought into the "it's just" argument, largely because they liked the idea of not having to smell cigarette smoke in restaurants.

Yet a few years later, the city of New York government decided to amend the NYC Health Code tell New York restaurants that they could no longer serve food cooked in oils that had trans-fat. Then New York City decided they had a right to tell people they couldn't smoke in public places OUTDOORS (2). Or how about the fact that California has a bill in their legislature to require hotels to use fitted sheets instead of flat sheets on the bottom of mattresses. (3) It's never "just" one thing. This bill will be no different. Activist Liberals have been pulling this move since the beginning of time (well, at least since the beginning of Liberalism). They will begin with a policy that seems harmless and insignificant at first. Neighborhood Liberals and less than informed “moderates” proceed to buy it, failing to notice the outcome in the case of such things as this bill or even enjoying the benefits in the case of the New York smoking ban. Then the “moderates” are appalled when it’s followed by bans on trans-fats or a requirement that hotels use flat sheets or whatever. Neighborhood Liberals usually buy it even at this point because they believe in the good intentions, never seeing their rights being taken away.

I know these people like the sound of my own mother’s voice. When you allow the Constitution to yield in the small things, it will be infringed upon in the long run in big ways. You watch. If this bill becomes law in two years (if we’re unfortunate enough to see another term of Obama) or the next time a Democrat is elected President, the Liberal narrative will become “look how streamlined and simple this process has become with assistant level appointees. We should streamline all appointees.” They will proceed to try to use this process on all appointees. Then they won’t have the check on Liberal activist judges or cabinet positions. This must be stopped. Time to act. Pass this bill around Twitter and Facebook. Talk to your friends. Call your representatives. Call them hourly if you need to. This bill is an absolute affront to the Constitution. It absolutely must be stopped. To let it slide through unnoticed will be disastrous. Time to fire it up, Patriots! Let’s kill this bill!

(1) The Constitution of the United States, Article II Section II (Paragraph II)

(2) Smoking Ban Sneaks Up On New Yorkers Still Puffing Away

(3) California bill would mandate fitted, rather than flat, sheets on hotel beds

No comments:

Post a Comment

All posts will be reviewed subject to the Rules for Commenting. Any post that does not abide by these rules will not be posted, entirely at the discretion of the blog editor.

Commenters who repeatedly violate these rules will be permanently banned from commenting, and thus none of their comments, regardless of content, will be posted.