The Issue: Pres. Obama’s four “recess“ appointments while, critics say, the Senate was in session.
***
If only the liberal media would follow The Post’s lead — President Obama’s assault on the Constitution could be stopped (“This Power Grab’s a Sign of Weakness,” John Podhoretz, PostOpinion, Jan. 6).
He’s been chipping away at the law of the land since he took power, and now his grasp exceeds the authority given him by that document.
Is this over-the-hill grandmother the only person who’s afraid of what will come next?
History books are rife with examples of unchecked power, audacity and arrogance, and the ending is always the same — the people suffer, freedoms are lost and a despot is born.
Patricia O’Hanlon
The Bronx
***
In 2007, the Senate held “pro-forma” sessions every three days to prevent President Bush from making recess appointments.
Bush accepted that the Senate technically wasn’t in recess and honored the constitutional separation of powers.
Last week, Obama made recess appointments to a consumer-watchdog post and to the NLRB while the Senate was holding the same pro-forma sessions.
Obama’s Democrats called these sessions a gimmick. They should know; they invented it.
The law says the Senate is in recess if no business is conducted for 10 days.
Pete Vetro
Beachwood, NJ
***
Your howls come several years too late. When Bush used a recess appointment to put John Bolton into office, you cheered him on.
It didn’t matter that Bolton was wrong for the position and never would have had a chance to be elevated if congressional approval had been required.
Yet, when Obama appointed Richard Cordray, a man the Republican leaders in Congress admit is amply qualified, your outrage knows no bounds.
President Reagan used recess appointments about 30 times per year on average; President George H. W. Bush, 19 times per year; President Clinton, 17 times per year and George W. Bush, 21 times per year.
Obama has thus far made only nine such appointments per year.
Kevin Koerper
Manhattan
***
Obama has been acting like a South American dictator since being elected.
It has been Obama who has refused to work with the Republican majority in the House this last year.
In his first two years, Obama had a Democratic-controlled Congress in which he was able to force his will on the nation.
This last year has been an all-out war against Congress in which Obama circumvented the legislative system and ruled the nation by executive order and imposing rules and regulations through the federal bureaucracy.
Obama is not Hugo Chavez, and this country is still a constitutional democracy. It is time for Congress to do its job and take back its legal functions under the Constitution now.
Stephen Kogan
Elizabeth, NJ
***
Three years into his term, Obama still finds recidivist stonewallers preventing important posts from being filled.
He had two alternatives: threaten the “nuclear option,” curtailing all Senate-minority tactics, including the filibuster, or make recess appointments.
The question of the Senate being in session is constitutionally unanswered.
The Senate did use the three-day tactic in 2007, but its validity hasn’t been tested.
These appointments aren’t permanent, lasting only until the end of the next Senate before requiring the normal nomination procedure.
Senate rules in general need an overhaul, since an unrepresentative minority has the ability to stymie the majority.
Your focus is misplaced and should be on the Senate, not recess appointments.
Steven Chinn
Manhattan
***
Reagan and the Bushes did it way more than Obama. What’s good for Peter is good for Paul.
Stop whining.
Rocco Pellone
Manhattan