President Obama’s controversial “recess” appointment strategy was underhanded, politically-motivated, an abuse of power, potentially unconstitutional, and pretty much every other label Republicans have thrown at it. But perhaps the worst part for the GOP is that it was also clever – and Republicans could have a tricky time fighting back.
Charles Krauthammer touched on the crux of the problem on Fox News last night (transcript via NRO):
It’s cynical and it works. Look, [opponents like me are] talking about process and procedure and what would look like arcana. And [the president is] arguing “I am protecting the little guy against the Republicans, who [use] constitutional niceties to protect the rich and the 1 percent, the ones who have robbed you.” It’s a good argument [politically]. He wins it. But I think it’s disgraceful.
Republicans are on the right side of this issue, but they may have a hard time winning over the general public. Typically, you oppose appointments because of problems with the appointees, but here the GOP is opposing them because of problems with the agencies themselves. They don’t want the agencies to be able to operate, which sounds obstructionist on its face, and it doesn’t help that these agencies are ostensibly focused on issues like labor and consumer protection. This situation is tailor-made for Obama’s reelection strategy.
The Wall Street Journal recommends that Congress start looking for other ways to push through the necessary reforms:
Congress can’t do much immediately to stop these appointments, but it ought to think creatively about how to fight back using its other powers—especially the power of the purse. However, private parties will have standing to sue if they are affected by one of Mr. Cordray’s rule-makings, and that’s when the courts may get a say on Mr. Obama’s contempt for Congress.
The idea of a legal challenge against Obama’s appointments has been raised constantly during the last two days, though it would be much more effective if the lawsuit was brought by a private party without blatant political associations than by the Senate or Chamber of Commerce.
In short, Obama has capitalized on the fact that we are now a nation wholly ignorant of basic civics and how the Constitution works.
Following up on Krauthammer, the problem for the GOP is that most people (and, critically, those voters who are up for grabs in November) don't really follow or understand whether one side is 'playing fair' (i.e, following the process). First, the voters don't know who to believe; they hear the Democrats saying it is okay, they hear the Republicans saying it isn't. This isn't like football where everybody knows the rules. They don't know the particulars of appointment law, and they have no interest in spending a lot of time learning it (not with football playoffs coming up). They thus tune out the whole debate as just another example of what is wrong with Washington. n
not only ignorant OF, but also not particularly interested IN. it's tragic.
Social Contract says that "the people" can only say, "No," that their silence is concurrence. What I would add is the power of the MSM, and their reaction. The 1968 Democratic convention may have helped turn people off to Humphrey, but the reaction was spectator sports-like. Kent State two years later generated a very strong "No," meaning the public generally didn't like the government killing their kids. The point is that the MSM influenced the reaction in both cases. Like they did on Watergate, Iran-Contra, and that CIA outing of Plame (sp?) — although the reaction wasn't a very resounding, "No," except on Watergate. But the MSM goes after Republicans (yeah, Weiner, but that was sexting). The MSM isn't going to push Obama or write more than "Gosh, darn, I don't see how that's legal."
Unlike those who believe the Senate should do nothing I disagree. They should make this a major issue and seek with the House not only to defund, but abolish NLRB and the Consumer “Fraud” Bureau. r nr nThis will be a major issue in 2012 and will stir up the base and reignite the Tea Party. Obama thinks acting like Hugo Chavez was smart politics, but it gives his critics just one more avenue to show he is totally incompetent and inept. r nr nWait till the jokes start flying about this supposed “Constitutional” lawyer.