Skip to content

New York Times columnists hate government transparency? Must be a Democrat in the White House. | David Freddoso | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

June 12, 2011

New York Times columnists hate government transparency? Must be a Democrat in the White House. | David Freddoso | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner.

 

Heh.

Advertisements
2 Comments
  1. Michael Eaton permalink
    June 17, 2011 8:28 am

    “In other words, Congress’ constitutional imperative to oversee an unaccountable executive branch official, appointed through subterfuge so as to avoid Senate confirmation, amounts to “harassment.” At least, it does when Republicans control Congress.”

    What??? There are confirmation proceedings, and then there is harassment. Shall I recall the billion (thereabouts) sound bites of “Up or down vote”?? Friggin’ get to it already. Has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with transparency.

    Oh, and “appointed through subterfuge”?????

    Like this:

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Recess_appointments_made_by_President_George_W._Bush

    Does that equal “subterfuge” or only when Obama does it? Weak.

  2. Michael Eaton permalink
    June 17, 2011 3:49 pm

    And why it friggin’ matters:

    “Gridlock is supposed to stop the government from acting. That’s what Republicans are hoping will happen, for instance, if they prevent the administration from ever confirming a director for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But often, that’s not quite what gridlock does. Like a car forced to take side streets, gridlock can reroute government action, force it to get where it’s going less efficiently, with more waste, and more chance of accidents. Take, for instance, the directorless Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

    “Josh Boak has a great story today explaining that, since the agency can’t make rules without a director, “the bureau most likely will set policy by conducting investigations.””

    “That’s not good for banks…“it’s very hard to fight an enforcement action. Usually, financial firms with their reputations on the line will settle.” Which suggests that the banks might want to prevail on their friends in the Republican Party to let a director be confirmed lest the CFPB turn into a headline-hungry bureau that works in public, with investigations and individually tailored punishments, rather than in private, through rules written in consultation with the financial sector.

    “The rerouting of government isn’t limited to consumer protection, of course. As I argued in this article, you can see it in energy policy, where the EPA is taking over carbon regulation because Congress couldn’t act, and the economy, where the Federal Reserve is stepping into a larger role because Congress won’t act, and health-care reform, where the Independent Payment Advisory Board is set to take over much of Medicare reform because Congress historically doesn’t act. Neither liberals nor conservatives should cheer these outcomes: It’s the substitution of less democratic, less accountable, and in many cases, less effective forms of governance. But in a situation where the majority wants to govern and the minority won’t let it, this is what you get: not gridlock, but the scenic route.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/when-government-takes-the-scenic-route/2011/05/19/AG5nM9YH_blog.html?wprss=ezra-klein

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: