# Just what is so scary or unconstitutional about the Obama Admin's "czars"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 3, 2009, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724 "2009-09-03T04:25:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/41 "2009-09-04T15:08:13Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Don’t turn around, uh oh … Thanks. ☹ Hmm hm hm hm, hm-hmm. Hmm hm hm hm hm hm, hm-hmm. I’ll kill you! :mad: ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/42 "2009-09-04T19:52:06Z")
What’s the big deal, anyway? Aren’t all of these czars doing things that the President already has authority over anyway? If he has the power, then he can delegate the power to someone else. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2009, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/43 "2009-09-04T20:29:34Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > What’s the big deal, anyway? Aren’t all of these czars doing things that the President already has authority over anyway? If he has the power, then he can delegate the power to someone else. But they’re _czars_, man, czars! That’s just **scary**. I mean, the word has ‘cz’ in it! What decent right-thinking Christian word has ‘cz’ in it, I ask you?! ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2009, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/44 "2009-09-05T02:43:44Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > But they’re _czars_, man, czars! That’s just **scary**. I mean, the word has ‘cz’ in it! What decent right-thinking Christian word has ‘cz’ in it, I ask you?! Let me czech back with you later on that one. ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/45 "2009-09-06T03:00:55Z")
Czar tsar tzar csar. Which is worst! ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/46 "2009-09-06T04:25:31Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > What’s the big deal, anyway? Aren’t all of these czars doing things that the President already has authority over anyway? If he has the power, then he can delegate the power to someone else. For whatever reason, the Constitution requires the President to get the advice and consent of the Senate whenever he wants to appoint an ambassador, as well as ‘public ministers and consuls’ and various ‘other officers of the United States’. If he got every Cabinet post filled _ **except** _ Secretary of Defense, I’d guess he could pretty much just shrug and get the job done anyway; he’s already the Commander-in-Chief, he can pretty much just order everyone around instead of delegating it to an intermediary. If, though, he got a SecDef approved (a) along with danged near everyone else he’d wanted, (b) but the Senate keeps rejecting his choices for ambassador to New Zealand or whatever, I’d figure he could handle those ambassadorial duties personally, if he felt like it; they’re all just stand-ins for him, right? Now, I have no idea why the Founders thought it was a big deal to require Senate confirmation of various and sundry folks who the President appoints to do stuff the President has authority over. Still, _ **whatever** _ that concern is, it’s presumably what czars manage an end-run around: they get the delegated goodies _ **without** _ needing the advice and consent of the Senate, which is supposed to be a big deal, for some reason. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/47 "2009-09-06T21:17:33Z")
The question then is what constitutes a “public minister” or “officer of the United States”, and whether the czars qualify. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/48 "2009-09-06T21:32:43Z")
> [@StaudtCJ](#): > > The meatheads would obviously fill them. Unless they can’t cut the mustard. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/49 "2009-09-06T21:40:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I know Glenn Beck keeps saying these “czars” differ from ordinary executive-branch officials in that they are exempt from Congressional oversight . . . but I have never yet seen a credible cite for that. Yet it’s a RW meme propagating virally all over the blogosphere right now, it seems. > > [The term “czar” has been applied to various kinds of U.S. officials, not all of them executive-branch, since the 1940s.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._executive_branch_%27czars%27) I couldn’t help but notice that Bush had more Czars than Obama has. I wonder if Mr Beck has mentioned that tidbit. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/50 "2009-09-06T23:24:13Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The question then is what constitutes a “public minister” or “officer of the United States”, and whether the czars qualify. Well, yes and no. I mean, sure, if someone lays out a terrific argument that the czars so qualify, then, yes, I’d see them as scary and unconstitutional. But my point is that, even if we grant for the sake of argument that they _ **don’t** _ qualify, it’s still plausibly scary that czars are exempt from the advice-and-consent bit when doing stuff rather like what ministers and officers with delegated authority do; I still don’t know _ **why** _ we think it’s so important for the latter, but I figure it should still make us raise an eyebrow about the former. It’s like if a hypothetical statute forbade anyone who’d ever served in the Army from being Secretary of Defense for some reason; I’d grant for the sake of argument that it doesn’t bar ex-Marines, but I’d still figure the same idea – whatever it was – should still concern us. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/51 "2009-09-06T23:33:42Z")
If he appoints a czar named John, could we then refer to him as Ivan the Great/Terrible? (Depending on performance, naturally!) ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2009, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/52 "2009-09-06T23:58:27Z")
KGB. Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti. Committee for State Security. Department of Homeland Security. People are just _now_ freaking out about vaguely Russian-sounding words in U.S. government? That ship has sailed. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2009, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724/53 "2009-10-29T19:02:41Z")
[George W. Bush’s Czars:](http://whitenoiseinsanity.com/2009/09/07/george-bush-36-czars-working-president-obama-32-czars/) > [@](#): > > Abstinence Czar (Randal Tobias) > AIDS Czar (4 Czars: Scott Evertz, Joe O’Neill, Carol Thompson, Jeffrey Crowley) > Bank Bailout Czar (Neel Kashkari) > Bioethics Czar ( Leon Kass) > Bird flu Czar (Stewart Simonson) > Birth control czar (Erik Keroack) > Budget czar (3 Czars: Mitchell Daniels, Joshua Bolton, Rob Portman) > Clean Up Czar (2 Czars: Jessie Roberson & James Rispoli) > Communications Czar (Dan Bartlett) > Cyber Security Czar, Cyber Czar (2 Czars: Richard Clarke, Rod Beckstrom) > Democracy Czar (Elliott Abrams) > Domestic Policy Czar (Karl Rove) > Drug Czar (John P. Walters) > Faith-Based Czar, Faith Czar (4 Czars: Don Willett, John Dilulio, Jim Towey, Jay Hein) > Food Safety Czar (David W.K. Acheson) > Global AIDS Czar (2 Czars: Randall Tobias, Mark Dybul) > Health Czar for WTC, World Trade Center Health Czar (John Howard) > Health IT Czar (David Brailer) > Homeland Security Czar (Michael Chertoff) > Homeless Czar, Homelessness Czar (Phil Mangano) > Gulf Coast Reconstruction Czar, Hurricane Katrina Recovery Czar (Donald E. Powell) > Intelligence Czar (2 Czars: John Negroponte & John Michael McConnell) > Manufacturing Czar (2 Czars: Albert Frink & William G. Sutton) > Policy Czar (Micahel Gerson) > Public Diplomacy Czar (2 Czars: Karen Hughes & James Glassman) > Reading Czar (G. Reid Lyon) > Regulatory Czar (2 Czars: John D. Graham & Susan Dudley) > Science Czar (John Marburger) > Terrorism Czar (3 Czars: Richard A. Clarke, Wayne Downing, John O. Brennan) > War Czar (Douglas Lute) See also [the White House’s statement on this subject:](http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/The-Truth-About-Czars/) > [@](#): > > **The Truth About “Czars”** > Posted by Anita Dunn on September 16, 2009 at 03:21 PM EDT > > Last week, when the President addressed the Joint Session of Congress in a speech on health reform, he referred to some of the untruths – okay, lies – that have been spread about the plan and sent a clear message to those who seek to undermine his agenda and his presidency with these tactics: “We will call you out.” So consider this one of those calls. > > Over the past several weeks, we’ve seen with increasing frequency and volume issues raised around the use of “czars” by this Administration. Although some Members have asked serious questions around the makeup of the White House staff, the bulk of the noise you hear began first with partisan commentators, suggesting that this is somehow a new and sinister development that threatens our democracy. This is, of course, ridiculous. Just to be clear, the job title “czar” doesn’t exist in the Obama Administration. Many of the officials cited by conservative commentators have been confirmed by the Senate. Many hold policy jobs that have existed in previous Administrations. And some hold jobs that involved coordinating the work of agencies on President Obama’s key policy priorities: health insurance reform, energy and green jobs, and building a new foundation for long-lasting economic growth > > But of course, it’s really the hypocrisy here that is noteworthy. Just earlier today, Darrell Issa, a Republican from California and one of the leaders in calling for an investigation into the Obama Administration’s use of “czars”, had to admit to Fox News that he had never raised any objections to the Bush Administration’s use of “czars”. Many of these members who now decry the practice have called on Presidents in the past to appoint “czars” to coordinate activities within the government to address immediate challenges. What is clear is that all of this energy going into these attacks could be used to have a constructive conversation about bringing this country together to address our challenges moving forward – and it doesn’t take a “czar” to bring that about! Just some folks willing to act in good faith. > > Take a look at the facts below – the truth about “czars”: > > \*\*_Rhetoric: Critics have claimed the Obama Administration is filled with new and unchecked czars._ > > Glenn Beck Claimed There Were 32 “Czars” In The Obama Administration.\*\* “The Brainroom counts 32 czars in the Obama administration, based on media reports from reputable sources that have identified the official in question as a czar.” [Glenn Beck Website, 8/21/09] > > **In Sunday’s Washington Post, Sen. Hutchison Claimed There Were An “Unprecedented 32 Czar Posts.”**"A few of them have formal titles, but most are simply known as “czars.’ They hold unknown levels of power over broad swaths of policy. Under the Obama administration, we have an unprecedented 32 czar posts (a few of which it has yet to fill), including a ‘car czar,’ a ‘pay czar’ and an ‘information czar.’” [Washington Post, 9/13/09] > > _ **Reality: Many of the arbitrarily labeled “czars” on Beck’s list are Senate-confirmed appointees or advisory roles carried over from previous administrations. Others are advisors to the President’s Cabinet Secretaries. Beck himself says on his own website, “Since czar isn’t an official job title, the number is somewhat in the eye of the beholder.”** _ > > Republicans have supported these positions in the past. When asked on Fox News if he had opposed any of President Bush’s “czars,” Rep. Darrell Issa admitted “No we didn’t.” In fact, the Bush administration had many of the same officials and advisors now described as “czars,” including Afghanistan czar, AIDS czar, Drug czar, Faith-based czar, Intelligence czar, Mideast Peace Czar, Regulatory Czar, Science Czar, Sudan Czar, TARP/Bailout Czar, Terrorism Czar, and Weapons Czar. > > \*\*Of the 32 “czars” on Beck’s list, nine were confirmed by the Senate: \*\* > > Deputy Interior Secretary David J. Hayes (“California Water Czar”) > Director of National Drug Control Policy Gil Kerlikowske (“Drug Czar”) > OMB Deputy Director Jeff Zients (“Government Performance Czar”) > Director of National Intelligence Adm. Dennis Blair (“Intelligence Czar”) > OMB Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Cass Sunstein (“Regulatory Czar”) > Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and OSTP Director John Holdren (“Science Czar”) > Treasury Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability Herb Allison (“TARP Czar”) > Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Ashton Carter (“Weapons Czar”) > OSTP Associate Director Aneesh Chopra (“Technology Czar”) > > Many of the same critics who are decrying these roles have applauded or even pushed for them in the past. Sen. Robert Bennett has criticized czars as “undermining the Constitution,” but reportedly prodded President Clinton to appoint a Y2K Czar. In a 1999 CNN appearance, Sen. Bennett said “I think John Koskinen has been superb. I wrote the president six months before John was appointed, recommending that he appoint a Y2K czar.” At a 1999 National Press Club luncheon, Bennett told reporters the Koskinen was “there to help, prod, give information, and make analyses and reports” and said he spoke with the czar to ensure “we maintain the kind of bipartisan and across-the-government sort of communication that this never becomes a political issue.” > > Senator Lamar Alexander has also criticized President Obama’s “czars,” calling them “an affront to the Constitution.” But during remarks delivered on the Senate floor in 2003, Sen. Alexander said “I would welcome” President Bush’s “manufacturing job czar.” That same day in the Senate, he also expressed support for President Bush’s AIDS czar Randall Tobias. > > When asked on Fox News if he had opposed any of President Bush’s “czars,” Rep. Darrell Issa responded “No we didn’t,” despite previously claiming that czars “undermine” transparency and accountability. > > In fact, last year, 176 House Republicans, including Issa, voted for a bill that would create an “Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator” that would advise the President and serve in the White House. By the time the bill passed the Senate, it was co-sponsored by 20 additional senators, including Sen. Alexander. > > _Anita Dunn is Director of Communications for the White House._ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-what-is-so-scary-or-unconstitutional-about-the-obama-admins-czars/508724.md?page=2)