|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Okie Boarder
Ladies Man
Joined: 03 Mar 2008
Posts: 10056
City: Edmond
|
 Posted: Jan 13, 2012 10:10 am Post subject: New power to consolidate... |
 |
|
On the surface, this seems like a good idea. I'd like to know more about what all it allows the President to do. I find it interesting he is doing this now rather than earlier in his term. Seems like a political move to gain support for the election more than it seems like a true concern for the problem.
| Quote: | Obama seeks power to merge agencies
By BEN FELLER | Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Friday took aim at his government's own messy bureaucracy, prodding Congress to give him greater power to merge agencies and promising he would start by collapsing six major economic departments into one. Pressing Republicans on one of their own political issues, Obama said it was time for an "effective, lean government."
Obama wants the type of reorganizational authority last held by a president when Ronald Reagan was in office. Obama's version would be a so-called consolidation authority allowing him to propose only mergers that promise to save money and shrink government. The deal would help Obama considerably by entitling him to an up-or-down vote from Congress in 90 days.
Still, final say would remain with lawmakers, both on whether to grant Obama this fast-track authority and then in deciding whether to approve any of his specific ideas.
"We can do this better," Obama declared in an event with business owners at the White House, even presenting slides to help make his case.
"So much of the argument out there all the time is up at 40,000 feet, these abstract arguments about who's conservative or who's liberal," Obama said. "Most Americans — and certainly most small business owners — you guys are just trying to figure out how do we make things work, how do we apply common sense. And that's what this is about."
In an election year and a political atmosphere of tighter spending, Obama's move is about more than improving a giant bureaucracy. He is attempting to directly counter Republican arguments that he has presided over the kind of government regulation, spending and debt that can undermine the economy — a dominant theme of the emerging presidential campaign.
Republicans have often aligned themselves with smaller government. So politically, Obama is trying to put the onus on Republicans in the House and Senate to show why they would be against the pursuit of leaner government.
From Capitol Hill, a spokesman for Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the top Republican in the Senate, pledged Obama's plan would get a careful review.
But the spokesman, Don Stewart, also said: "After presiding over one of the largest expansions of government in history, and a year after raising the issue in his last State of the Union, it's interesting to see the president finally acknowledge that Washington is out of control."
Obama has an imperative to deliver. He made the promise to come up with a smart reorganization of the government in his last State of the Union speech last January.
At the time, Obama grabbed attention by pointing out the absurdity of government inefficiency. In what he called his favorite example, Obama said: "The Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they're in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them when they're in saltwater. And I hear it gets even more complicated once they're smoked."
The White House said the problem is serious for consumers who turn to their government for help and often do not know where to begin.
Not in decades has the government undergone a sustained reorganization of itself. Presidents have tried from time to time, but each part of the bureaucracy has its own defenders inside and outside the government, which can make merger ideas politically impossible. That's particularly true because "efficiency" is often another way of saying people will lose their jobs.
Obama hopes to enhance his chances by getting Congress to give him the assurance of a clean, relatively speedy vote on any of his proposals.
There is no clear sign that Obama would get that cooperation. He spent much of 2011 in utter gridlock with Republicans in Congress.
In the meantime, Obama announced Friday that Karen Mills, the administrator of the Small Business Administration, would be elevated to Cabinet-level rank. But her job would essentially disappear if Obama has his way.
If he gets the new fast-track power to propose legislation, Obama's first project would be to combine six major operations of the government that focus on business and trade.
They are: the Commerce Department's core business and trade functions; the Small Business Administration; the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative; the Export-Import Bank; the Overseas Private Investment Corporation; and the Trade and Development Agency. The goal would be one agency designed to help businesses thrive.
The White House says 1,000 to 2,000 jobs would be cut, but the administration would do so through attrition; that is, as people routinely leave their jobs over time.
The administration said the merger would save $3 billion over 10 years by getting rid of duplicative overhead costs, human resources divisions and programs.
The name and potential secretary of the new agency have not been determined.
The point, the White House says, is not just making the government smaller but better by saving people time and eliminating bureaucratic nightmares. The idea for the consolidated business agency grew out of discussions with hundreds of business leaders and agency heads over the last several months.
Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said streamlining government was always a potentially good idea but expressed wariness about whether Obama's plan would really help business.
"American small businesses are more concerned about this administration's policies than from which building in Washington they originate," Buck said. "We hope the president isn't simply proposing new packaging for the same burdensome approach."
According to the White House, presidents held such a reorganizational authority for about 50 years until it ran out during Reagan's presidency in 1984. |
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-seeks-power-merge-agencies-161650498.html
_________________
If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
jryoung
Ladies Man
Joined: 19 Mar 2004
Posts: 7664
City: Man Jose
|
| Posted: Jan 13, 2012 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Was reading about this on a gun forums....the views there are hilarious.
To them this is about Obama seeking to gain unprecedented power......but if you look in any Ron Paul or Rick Perry thread they are totally in favor of this....as long as it was not Obama doing it.
I love the hypocracy of politics.
_________________
| Quote: | | You don't meet many old vegans. It's mostly young priviliged kids trying to figure out where they stand in the world. |
- Steve Rinella |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neognosis
Ladies Man
Joined: 13 Jan 2003
Posts: 17617
City: Webster
|
| Posted: Jan 13, 2012 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I find most of what appears on gun forums to be hilarious.
and yes, hypocrisy. If obama does this this now, it's about the election. If he did it when first elected, it would be proof that he's a socialist seeking unbridled power.
If/When a republican does it, it will be spun as "reducing the size of gov't."
_________________
I walk 47 miles of barb wire, I got a cobra snake for a necktie, a brand new house up on the road side, and it's made out of rattlesnake hide |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Okie Boarder
Ladies Man
Joined: 03 Mar 2008
Posts: 10056
City: Edmond
|
| Posted: Jan 13, 2012 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You know, I have disagreed with just about everything Obama has done, but this is one I could get behind (based on what I read in the article).
_________________
If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nor*Cal
Ladies Man
Joined: 12 Jan 2003
Posts: 9479
City: Sac
|
| Posted: Jan 15, 2012 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Schwarzenegger was elected on a promise to consolidate and reorganize or in his words, "blowing up the boxes." He had momentum until a special election to finalize all the big moves took place. Public unions successfully blocked it and CA has since resorted back to where things were. Now Governor Brown is doing the same thing but in the budget bills. Guessing he will be more successful because of that strategy.
The bureaucracy has always been firmly in control of the President and technically he does not need legislative approval to reorg how those offices function. He does need legislation for those changes to last beyond his term and to make things easier on the OMB.
This is an election thing to reinforce the "Jobs, jobs, jobs" mantra along as an austerity measure. This is the President trying to take the moderates. But it's probably a decent idea as well, but in an election year some Reeps will oppose further making them look foolish and perhaps influencing the Reep primaries to a candidate Obama's camp thinks is easier to run against.
_________________
If I agreed with you we would both be wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Add To Favorites
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Copyright © 2012 - Wakeboarding - Wakeboarder.com - All Right Reserved
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Stats
Favorites
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
