THE HILL
 

Czar light, czar bright

By Cheri Jacobus - 11/05/09 07:01 PM ET

After a flurry of justifiable outcries over a number of individuals President Barack Obama chose as his “czars,” the political heat seems to have cooled. How unfortunate. But perhaps with the lowered temperature, the Senate will have the freedom to take some responsible measures to address this ever-expanding problem.

While the political alarm bells have been clanging from the right over some of the questionable czars appointed by Obama, it is natural the public would commence to vet the czars in instances where the president has skirted past the Senate. “If the Senate isn’t going to vet these czars, then by golly, we will!” seems to be the battle cry, and understandably so.

However, the objective should not solely be to shine a light on Van Jones, Obama’s “green jobs czar” until he resigned, although it was a positive and necessary move. Kevin Jennings, the Safe and Drug Free Schools czar who has some seriously disturbing statements in his past regarding sexual relations between teenagers and adults in addition to his controversial positions on sexual orientation education for schoolchildren, also needs to go. Perhaps there are more. But the problems with these individuals should mainly serve to underscore the larger, more important point — that without proper vetting and the advise-and-consent role of the United States Senate, disaster lies in wait.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) recently conducted a hearing in the Judiciary Committee’s Constitution subcommittee in a laudable attempt to address the proliferation of czars in the Obama administration and the extent to which they operate outside the parameters of any sort of congressional oversight, particularly those reporting directly and exclusively to the president. The White House was invited to send a representative to testify at the hearing, but declined the senator’s overture. Feingold’s intent to address what he deems a serious constitutional issue, regardless of the individuals in those czar roles, is precisely how the Senate should proceed from here. Presumably, this exercise would be of value to future administrations, Republican or Democrat.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) also conducted a czar-related hearing in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. In an attempt to help ensure transparency and a more legislatively defined role for czars as part of the system of checks and balances, the committee’s ranking Republican, Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), has announced plans to introduce legislation to eliminate funding for the czars unless they appear before Congress.

Even if every individual on Obama’s czar list, those under President George W. Bush and previous presidents were absolutely, positively the bee’s knees, the Senate needs to discern that fact and examine the czars’ roles and accountability through oversight. Many czars are granted the authority to develop and implement key policy initiatives, much in the same way Senate-confirmed Cabinet secretaries do. Because many czars are not confirmed by the Senate, there is virtually no oversight of their activities. Therein lies the rub.

When George W. Bush piled up a collection of czars, many in his own party were concerned and there were more than a few raised eyebrows. With Obama already appointing 18 new czars not subject to Senate confirmation, we seem to have encountered the tipping point. The Senate needs to take a close bipartisan look at this trend and be prepared to take action. It is off to a good start, but it can’t end with just the Feingold and Lieberman hearings – especially in light of the Obama White House’s shameful refusal to cooperate with the senators’ request to send an administration representative to testify at the hearings alongside the esteemed experts and academics on the witness list.

With the legislative leadership of moderate Republican Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lieberman, and hopefully with the support of the principled progressive Feingold, the country may well, indeed, benefit from a bipartisan (tripartisan?), balanced, responsible and welcome effort to ensure transparency and a return to a proper advise-and-consent role for the Senate, regardless of which party is in power.

Whether the political heat is turned up, or cools considerably, Congress needs to stay on top of the czar issue. The American people deserve to have confidence that even if they do not agree with the president — any president — on the issues, at least there is proper oversight by a body of their democratically elected officials of those creating government policy that affects us all.

Jacobus, president of Capitol Strategies PR, has managed congressional campaigns, worked on Capitol Hill and is an adjunct professor at George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management. She appears on MSNBC, CNN and FOX News as a GOP strategist.

Source:
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/cheri-jacobus/66627-czar-light-czar-bright

Comments (10)

It is simply constitutional. Balance of power is the only protection for the populus no matter what ideolgy is in consideration.BY jadedfellow on 11/05/2009 at 20:54
Obama needs all these czars as he does not know much of anything. Czars are educating him so that he does not look ignorant. Hopefully they can educate him in time for 2012, otherwise he is a lost cause.BY Ike Hana on 11/05/2009 at 21:29
Well… I visit your website first time and found this site very useful and interesting! Well… you guys doing nice work and I just want to say that keep rocking and keep it up!!!!barbaraad ministration jobs in londonBY Elenora on 11/06/2009 at 01:27
You are a homophobe.BY Doug Hall on 11/06/2009 at 08:57
Why are we even putting up with "czars" in any positions in the American government?!?! The name implies "ruler" as in the czars of Russia (Czar Nikolas) prior to the 20th century before the Bolshevik revolution. The very word itself should never be used by elected representatives in our democratic republic! For God's sake the very language we use has meaning this Marxist creep of terminology only serves to underline the far more dangerous very real Marxism that now exists at the highest echelons of American governance. People, our liberty, our veryu country is being stripped away from us while we discuss troublesome nature of appointed czars. There should be no czars…period!BY John Michaels on 11/06/2009 at 11:07
The ONLY czar to be concerned with was Obama's czar of twisted religion, racism and white hatred, the Rev, Jeremiah Wright. Those who voted for Obama have set in motion the destruction of our country. Do not make the same mistakes next year in 2010, vote republican and vote these communists out.BY dthorny on 11/06/2009 at 13:31
In addition to problems with the CZARS, there is the issue that the Obama administration and Congress is shredding the Constitution on a daily basis. Many lawyers and Constitutional authorities agree on this. My question is: why can't they be stopped? When questioned by Mic[***]e Bashman, Geithner could not point to any place in the Constitution that allowed the TARP program. What is it going to take to stop these criminals???BY Mad in Houston on 11/06/2009 at 15:26
CZARS—————Who's paying for the Czars we are the TAXES PAYERS !! Who watches over these Czars no body. Van Jones Kevin Jennings are why this CZAR BUSSINESS MUST BE STOPPED.Where are the BLUE DOGS to stop this madness ? This out of control spending ? BLUE DOGS HAVE ROLLED OVER PLAYING DEAD! Voice from TexasBY Reb Wood  on 11/08/2009 at 09:15
Havins Czars is SO SO SO STUPID!!! CZARS were russian dictators!!! Is that what we want???BY nh on 11/09/2009 at 12:06
You are asking a bunch of crooks approving another bunch of crooks. What's that old saying, "that's a kettke calling another kettle black." There is no oversight, there is only partisan politics. Murtha wants another runway for his non-used airport, Inouye of Hawaii wants a defense contract, Cao wants money for his LA district and sold his vote on HealthCare to get it. Ad infinitum. What an ill-written piece of tripe by I guess one of our leading scholars. This country has fallen…and will shortly be a banana Republic…better yet part of the Islamic world, which is Ali Bambi's true intention. Once a Muslim always a Muslim.BY HolyBlitzer on 11/10/2009 at 07:39

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.