The US is not a Dictatorship of a Monarchy. CZARS are UNCONSTITUTIONAL authorities that undermine the LAWS and LIBERTIES under such a Constitution because they are appointed by the “executive” office and then execute authority of that office without the concurent agreement of the Congress or Senate. They are the tentacles of the EXECUTIVE office. The government will never WANT to cut off an appendage of it’s own. THAT IS WHY THE AUTHORITY OF THE PEOPLE IS VITAL to this COUNTRY. There are a number of Constitutional requirements that give authority instead of only what the RIGHTS of the PEOPLE ARE. The VIRTUE of this constitution, and it says it in the PREAMBLE, is that the people have ALL the LIBERTIES and RIGHTS. The AUTHORITY of the government over the people is limited and only those that are SPECIFIED in the Constitution, are the extents of government authority.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.(http://www.senate.gov/civics/constitution_item/constitution.htm#preamble)
House Republicans Push Bill to Shut Down White House ‘Czars’
Published January 07, 2011
House Republicans have President Obama’s “czars” in their crosshairs once again, introducing a bill this week that would effectively shut down their offices.
The bill, authored by Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., is a revamped version of a proposal that went nowhere in the last Congress. But with Republicans in charge of the House this year and a particularly combative Republican in charge of the committee that will be considering the measure, the proposal might have a fighting chance this time around.
“We’re hopeful for this one,” Scalise spokesman Stephen Bell told FoxNews.com.
Though the definition of a “czar” is muddy at best, it generally refers to top-level administration officials who don’t have to go through the Senate confirmation process. The Scalise bill aims to be a bit more specific than that, defining a “czar” as the “head of any task force, council, policy office within the Executive Office of the President” or similar office, appointed “without the advice and consent of the Senate.”
Scalise’s office estimates that 39 officials in the Obama administration fall under this description. The bill would order Congress to cut off all funding for them and the offices they control. Presumably, the president could afterward try to reinstate them by seeking Senate confirmation
“It’s to encourage transparency,” Bell said. “So that everybody knows who they are, what they stand for.”
The bill, introduced on the first day of the session Wednesday, has so far attracted 28 other co-sponsors. The White House could not be reached for comment on the proposal.
Though past efforts to target these posts have failed, the Scalise bill might get some attention this year as it heads next to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., a leading Obama administration critic, is the new chairman of that committee and has already set the stage for a rigorous agenda of hearings.
Issa’s office had no comment on the Scalise bill Friday.
The “czars” have been a popular target for Republicans ever since Obama took office, though these high-level officials have been appointed under several administrations. The Nixon administration had an energy czar and the George H.W. Bush administration appointed the first drug czar within the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
The White House avoids the term “czar.” Jones was technically an adviser to the White House Council on Environmental Quality and Holdren is technically director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy