Czar Power

The focus on Obama’s czars has mostly been on their number. As of now, there are roughly three dozen, or thirty two, depending on your headcount.

The issue that should be highlighted is the power of these czars. The American Thinker recalls the power, in another time and place of “commissars.”

The three dozen or so people that Barack Obama has surrounded himself with to handle this problem or that issue, and yet are not confirmed by the Senate or operating an agency created by Congress, are not really his "czars." These people are, instead, his "commissars." Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany both called those vague, undefined figures appointed by the Leader to carry out his intentions "commissars" ...

Congress has the right and the duty to review, confirm, or reject the chief officer of the federal executive and legislative branches (except, of course, for the president and vice president.) And Congress has the right and the duty to remove any important federal officer who is corrupt or exceeds the powers of his office. The duty of Congress to remove corrupt principal officers of the executive and judicial branches is often simply forgotten. If the Secretary of the Treasury, for example, engages in some stinky behavior, he usually simply resigns. But whether he does -- indeed, even if he does -- the House can impeach him and the Senate can convict him.

That is a deliberate check the Founding Fathers intended to give Congress over the Executive Branch. But could the House impeach or how could the Senate convict an Obama commissar, who had never been confirmed by the Senate and who held a position not created by Congress? Cabinet secretaries and heads of agencies are accountable both to the president and to Congress. These commissars, on the other hand, could not be impeached and removed from office because they do not, formally, hold an office.

The question becomes, where do these czars – or commissars – derive their authority? The question is important because the authority some claim to possess is vast. From The Gartman Letter:

...we are growing weary of the number of “Czars” that President Obama is appointing for the US, and we are even more wary of the power that these men and women are and shall be wielding over the course of the next three years. We fear the centralization of power in Washington more than we fear almost anything these days for these “Czars” believe that they have been anointed rather than appointed, and their lust for power is really quite frightening.

We say this in light of the statement from the newly appointed “Pay Czar,” Mr. Kenneth Feinberg, who was, until recently, Sen.Ted Kennedy’s Chief of Staff. His official title is “Special Master for Compensation,” a title that only a Politburo member or a Social Democrat would find comforting. It is, however, his own comments regarding his area of overview and the power that he believes he has that cause us the greatest concern. When asked what powers he shall wield, Mr. Feinberg said

The statute provides guideposts, but the statue ultimately says I have the discretion to decide what it is that… people should make and that my determination will be final….Anything is possible under the law.

Re-read this again and consider for a moment what it means. He did indeed say that “Anything is possible” and he did indeed say previously that his “determination will be final.” If this is not central planning, we know not what is? If this is not overreach, what is? If this is not dangerous, what is? This is not the change that many of our friends on Wall Street thought they were supporting with their money, their time and their votes last November. At this pace, Atlas will not be allowed to shrug; he will be shackled instead.

We have a commissar who believes his authority extends to setting the pay of people … without limit … since he has discretion to do anything and from his determination is no appeal.

That’s an issue of pay.

Now the same government will surely be appointing a health czar, because you can be sure that if “health reform” passes, it will require a commissar whose determination is final and whose discretion is infinite.