Federal 'czars' and Art 1 Sec 9 of the constitution

[Reyemile]

I realize it’s an informal title, but doesn’t appointing a ‘drug czar’ violate the constitution?

[QUOTE=The Constitution]
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States
[/QUOTE]

[Simplicio]

‘Drug Czar’ is a nickname used by the press. Its not a Title of Nobility, and isn’t granted by the US gov’t.

[Giles]

Even if it were granted as a title by the US, a czar isn’t nobility – it’s royalty.

[Little_Nemo]

Nobody is appointed to the position of Drug Czar. The position is the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@Little_Nemo

Nobody is appointed to the position of Drug Czar. The position is the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

And the ONDCP functions in an advisory capacity only, AFAIK. It doesn’t direct the DEA or otherwise engage in actual enforcement.

[Zoe]

Calling someone by a nickname doesn’t make that person literally what you call her or him. (Elvis wasn’t really a king in the sense that “king” is normally used.There are other examples.) The term “czar” has been used for a long time in our government. Someone decided in recent times to make people suspicious of its use. I wonder why…

[Diceman]

Also, isn’t a title of nobility something that gets passed down to your descendants? Even if my dad was the Drug Czar, that doesn’t mean I’m going to get the title when he dies.

[constanze]

@Diceman

Also, isn’t a title of nobility something that gets passed down to your descendants?

Not always - besides inheritable titles, European states had lifetime noble titles to honour individuals without establishing new competition houses.

[constanze]

Here’s an older article about the silliness of this argument.

Tea partiers tend to revere the U.S. Constitution in much the same way that many American evangelicals revere the Bible, which is to say they read it without comprehension, looking only for ammunition that can be used against their enemies. And since neither text was written for such a purpose, this so-called reverence is an exercise in illiteracy.

Tea party candidate Christine O’Donnell provided a classic example of this obtuse proof-texting illiteracy recently, accusing President Barack Obama of violating the Constitution through the century-old American convention of nicknaming ad hoc executive branch appointments "czars.

The presidency of George W. Bush is not such a distant memory that she can have forgotten his appointment of more than 30 such “czars.” Christine O’Donnell has shared platforms with former “drug czar” Bill Bennett and has heard him introduced as such. It beggars belief that she really took this to mean that Bennett had been conferred a “title of nobility” — that his eldest son would one day inherit the chairmanship of the Office on National Drug Policy, perhaps arranging an alliance though marriage with some daughter of former homeland security “czar” Tom Ridge and uniting their kingdoms.

No one is that stupid. And that leaves only one other possible explanation.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@constanze

…No one is that stupid. And that leaves only one other possible explanation.

That the Okhrana is leaning on her?

[Simplicio]

Kinda wish I’d read this thread before making an ass of myself in the drive through the other day trying to swear fealty to the Burger King.

[DrFidelius]

And I am certain that no one in northern India paid tribute to Babe Ruth, despite his being named the “Sultan of Swat.” (I know it’s in Pakistan now, but at the time it was an Indian state.)

[Fear_Itself]

@DrFidelius

And I am certain that no one in northern India paid tribute to Babe Ruth, despite his being named the “Sultan of Swat.”

Wait, the Babe was a Muslim?

[Rhythmdvl]

@DrFidelius

And I am certain that no one in northern India paid tribute to Babe Ruth, despite his being named the “Sultan of Swat.” (I know it’s in Pakistan now, but at the time it was an Indian state.)

Be careful of your could end up in Dire Straits.

[MikeS]

I’m surprised that people don’t remember the trouble that CBS got into when they named Kevin James the King of Queens back in 1998.

[Jack_Batty]

Imagine the shit-storm if Larry King were ever elected president.

[RealityChuck]

We already had a King as president – Leslie King, later known as Gerald Ford.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

And why didn’t Elizabeth II chop the heads off the members of the rock group Queen? High treason, every one of 'em!

[IntelliQ]

The reason for the nickname is that advisers (during any presidency) are not elected, do not require senate confirmation, yet have great influence and virtually no accountability.

Adding balance to the tea party invective above, I submit the current administration comes under extra criticism for the choice of “czars”/ advisers because of their backgrounds and behaviors which many Americans find distasteful. Surely advisers of previous administrations have come under fire for one reason or another (before there was a Tea Party to blame), but let’s stick to the here and now, merely as a counterweight to the notion that using critical labels for current advisers is “silly”.

For example:

Van Jones - “Green Jobs Czar”: Admitted Communist, petitioned with 911Truth.org a nutty group who believes Bush allowed 9/11 to happen on purpose, called Republican citizens “assholes” during speeches, involved with the radical marxist group “STORM”, helped organize a protest in defense of cop-killer (and “former” Black Panther) Mumia Abu-Jamal, …the list could go on. But he’s gone now after much public outcry, but Obama still gave him his props after he resigned.
Tarp Czar: Allison, Herb - CEO of Fannie Mae

Car and Mfg Czar: Ron Bloom who said that “The free market is nonsense” and “We kind of agree with Mao, that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun.”

Terrorism Czar: John Brennan who opposed U.S. military actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I don’t remember the official title of Obama’s jobs adviser but if Im not mistaken he is/was the head of GE which made billions in profits last year and used a legal loophole to avoid paying taxes. No matter how you slice this one, the current administrations lips do not gel with 3 year long and running campaign rhetoric about closing loopholes and “paying fair shares”.

The list is goes on like this sigh, so anyone insinuating (quite divisively for no reason) that it’s a Tea Party propoganda term would do well to see the big picture and try to understand why the term czar is used frequently. And the next guy whoever he is, if his advisors are socialists, marxists, abusers of capitalism, or any combination of them, you can bet the terms to describe them will not be kind. With or without a Tea Party.

[Simplicio]

@IntelliQ

The reason for the nickname is that advisers (during any presidency) are not elected, do not require senate confirmation, yet have great influence and virtually no accountability.

Except of course, most of them are confirmed by the Senate. The drug czar, for example, is head of the National Council of Drug Enforcement policy, a position created by legislation and requiring confirmation. Its basically just a nickname for highlevel gov’t employees whose actual titles are too unwiedly for every day use. The Tarp Czar is the ssistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability of the United States, a position that requires Senate Confirmation. Etc etc.

Some don’t require confirmation, but those are 1) in the minority and 2) usually purely advisory positions under the WH.

he list is goes on like this sigh, so anyone insinuating (quite divisively for no reason) that it’s a Tea Parhy propoganda term would do well to see the big picture

It is, at least the part of it that they “do not require senate confirmation, yet have great influence and virtually no accountability.” That isn’t true, and used to make it sound like their somesort of endrun around the Constitution.