Prior to President Obama, every president since FDR has appointed 'czars' to head various parts of his administration. FDR set the precedent with only 12 czars, and after his terms, the number began to decline. Until, that is, Bill Clinton. Clinton upped the ante with 7 czars, but HBush far out-appointed him, with 31.
President Obama has quickly outpaced even Bush, eight months into his four-year term, with 32 czars as of last count.
According to Politico, President Obama's czar positions range from an 'Afghanistan Czar' to 'WMD Policy Czar.'
Apparently, the czars are yet another layer of government, reporting directly to the President, as well as a few to Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State. These czars work on solutions and policy. In a way, they are somewhat like the advisement department of a company.
Of course, in the grand company of which Obama is the CEO, that role is supposed to be filled by his cabinet. But oops, somebody didn't tell that to FDR or to Obama. Quite an oversight there.
According to a professor of government at Dartmouth College, Linda Fowler, "presidents often appoint czars in a symbolic move to show they care about an issue. They also are trying to control a sprawling bureaucracy..."
Personally, I think this system of czars is messed up. The President isn't supposed to control policy on any issue at all! Having czars to do his bidding is even more unconstitutional. The czars are filling a role which is supposed to be handled by Congress.
Of course, if Congress wasn't so busy with all the other junk they deal with, they might be able to fill their Constitutional capacity better.
Posts
1 comment:
I think what bothers many is that we do not know what authority these czars wield.
The other thing is, as far as the symbolism goes, just look at the associations and direct ties these folks have! Many are radicals to the extreme.
Post a Comment