Reagan Attorney General Ed Meese and Todd Gaziano, both with my employer The Heritage Foundation, have written an excellent piece in the Washington Post explaining why the installation of Richard Cordray as head of the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and Richard Griffin, Sharon Block and Terence Flynn to be on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are unconstitutional acts.The president claimed to use the constitutional power of the president to make recess appointments.

As another Heritage colleague, Hans von Spakovsky, explains for Pajamas Media, Congress is not in recess. The Senate actually conducted some very important business during one of the “pro-forma” sessions the White House has called a “gimmick”: On Dec. 23, it passed the payroll tax extension that caused such a political uproar in Washington.

Congress has five options to respond to this power grab by the executive branch of the federal government:

1. Filibuster all nominations and deny unanimous consent to the waiver of any rule with regard to nominations until these four unconstitutional appointments are rescinded
2. Condition passage of all must-pass legislation on the rescission of these unconstitutional appointments
3. Conduct vigorous oversight to demand the production of witnesses and documents supporting the president’s legal theory justifying this unprecedented power grab
4. Make major cuts in funding of the NLRB and the Department of the Treasury where the CFPB was placed by its authorizing statute
5. Pursue legal remedies to get those unconstitutionally appointed officials out of office. 

Read More →

Reagan Attorney General Ed Meese and Todd Gaziano, both with my employer The Heritage Foundation, have written an excellent piece in the Washington Post explaining why the installation of Richard Cordray as head of the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and Richard Griffin, Sharon Block and Terence Flynn to be on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are unconstitutional acts.The president claimed to use the constitutional power of the president to make recess appointments.

As another Heritage colleague, Hans von Spakovsky, explains for Pajamas Media, Congress is not in recess. The Senate actually conducted some very important business during one of the “pro-forma” sessions the White House has called a “gimmick”: On Dec. 23, it passed the payroll tax extension that caused such a political uproar in Washington.

Congress has five options to respond to this power grab by the executive branch of the federal government:

1. Filibuster all nominations and deny unanimous consent to the waiver of any rule with regard to nominations until these four unconstitutional appointments are rescinded
2. Condition passage of all must-pass legislation on the rescission of these unconstitutional appointments
3. Conduct vigorous oversight to demand the production of witnesses and documents supporting the president’s legal theory justifying this unprecedented power grab
4. Make major cuts in funding of the NLRB and the Department of the Treasury where the CFPB was placed by its authorizing statute
5. Pursue legal remedies to get those unconstitutionally appointed officials out of office. 

Read More →

Ezra Klein responds via Twitter. See below.

There’s so much wrong in this column from Ezra Klein’s blog at the Washington Post that it’s hard to know where to begin. Ezra is waxing partisan about the recess appointment of Richard Cordray to be President Obama’s head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, trying desperately to find some justification for this unprecedented flouting of the Constitution. But Master Klein plays too fast and loose with the facts, even for a liberal wunderkind.

Let’s try to take them one at a time.

Read More →

Today, President Obama appointed Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) while the Senate was in pro forma session. The CFPB is an unaccountable bureaucratic nightmare that was birthed from the Dodd-Frank bill, and Republicans are rightfully criticizing this latest abuse of power by the Obama Administration. The criticism of this appointment is warranted for several reasons...

CNN is just now reporting that the President plans to recess appoint Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  Such a recess appointment was previously assumed to be impossible, given that: the assumed minimum length of time is three days; and the Senate is deliberately meeting every two days in order to prevent recess appointments during that time period.  The Hill helpfully notes (via @RBPundit) that the three-day limit is actually from the Clinton era: they also note that Obama’s then Solicitor General noted the three-day rule during Supreme Court arguments (Politico gives the case as being New Process Steel, L.P. v National Labor Relations Board).  That his administration is now going to reverse themselves on this should come as a surprise to nobody; neither should it be a surprise that this administration apparently has absolutely no awareness whatsoever that their actions will have consequences that will make Democrats curse this White House for the next thirty years.

That’s pretty much it, except for one final note: ever hear of “unanimous consent,” Mr. President?  No?  Well, you will.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

CNN is just now reporting that the President plans to recess appoint Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  Such a recess appointment was previously assumed to be impossible, given that: the assumed minimum length of time is three days; and the Senate is deliberately meeting every two days in order to prevent recess appointments during that time period.  The Hill helpfully notes (via @RBPundit) that the three-day limit is actually from the Clinton era: they also note that Obama’s then Solicitor General noted the three-day rule during Supreme Court arguments (Politico gives the case as being New Process Steel, L.P. v National Labor Relations Board).  That his administration is now going to reverse themselves on this should come as a surprise to nobody; neither should it be a surprise that this administration apparently has absolutely no awareness whatsoever that their actions will have consequences that will make Democrats curse this White House for the next thirty years.

That’s pretty much it, except for one final note: ever hear of “unanimous consent,” Mr. President?  No?  Well, you will.

Moe Lane (crosspost)