anyone know where you can find a list of how many czars each president has had?

i heard a rumor that obama is going to annoint a RM Czar to oversee red mosquito.

One czar is too many... they're pretty much an unconstitutional entity.

i seen a senator brought that up to. but a great lakes czar and now one for california seems a bit wishy-washy to me

Yup. It's an extension of the spoils system and centralizing executive power. Nothing more, nothing less.

czars ruined the tourism industry in Toronto.

I don't know about "unconstitutional", but otherwise I agree.

Plus I hate the use of the term "czar". Some of our ancestors had not so great experiences with real czars. Why don't they just appoint a "Drug Policy Führer"?

I don't think you could possibly justify their existance as being anything other than unconstitutional. They exist at the order of the president, without having to answer to the judicial or legislative branch of government. They have no oversight whatsoever except for the man that personally appointed them. That is unconstitutional in every respect.

Depends on the ratio to the Bolsheviks really.

The Czars didn't do to well the first time.

I don't really undersand the point of the title for the most part. We have congressional committees for this sort of thing already anyway. As far as I can tell it's a glorified secretary to the president in charge of reading reports and investigating numbers to help the president to decide on policy.

If it were run like a corporation they would be essentially a project manager.

It's not really any different than the President's executive assistant. The person has no real powers, other than the President has asked them to head up a team tackling a certain problem, mainly because the president himself doesn't have the time to do it. "Type this letter". "Figure out how best to decrease carbon emissions and report back to me". The scale is different, but as far as the purpose goes, there's no substantive difference.

I still don't see how appointing people to head up and tackle problems that are outside of the presidents constitutional obligations is "constitutional." The Great Lakes czar is unconstitutional. The Fine Print Czar is unconstitutional. The Female Abuse Czar is unconstitutional.

I would also say that they do have power, as Obama is using their existance to fund these programs. These czars are overseeing the expenditure of hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars. I'm sorry, but that is power.

i see no problem with the existence of these guys. i don't really understand why the title is used, but since they're really no more than the main advisor to the president on an issue i see no problem with their existence. great lakes czar actually makes sense; i'd assume some dealing with interstate water issues is done.

You must be one of those crazy tea party revolutionists that don't know jack about the constitution.

How about the fact that you and I are paying their salaries.

It's a symptom of a much bigger problem, obviously.

it's no different than paying the salaries of advisors though. i don't have any idea of the figures they're paid, but they could easily get the same pay regardless of the czar title.

The problem of government actually governing?

So, what section of the Constitution does their existence violate? Please be specific or don't bother replying.

Article II - The Executive Branch
Section 3 - State of the Union, Convening Congress





---

both of these tasks might require "czars."

You'll probably sit here and defend the Homeland Security dept. also.

You know, at the dawn of the Republic, there was a Department of State, a Department of the Treasury, and a Department of War. That was it. The world has become more complicated, and government has reacted to that by growing. It is not the government's growth that has made the world more complicated, just as rappers don't cause gang crime.

As for DHS specifically, I may not approve of some of the specific powers granted to them, or how those powers may have been carried out, but I don't dispute the constitutionality of its very existence.

I'm not questioning the constitutionality, just the necessity.

D-H-S = B-O-O-N-D-O-G-G-L-E