Court: Obama appointments to labor panel are unconstitutional. (Quad Source) - Polidicks

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39370188]Not true, the tea party formed during the Bush administration because they were so outraged. Bush was a tyrant, there is no question about it. [editline]26th January 2013[/editline] In order for congress to be in recess, both the House of Representatives and the Senate must agree to a recess. When the first congress was held, there were no air planes, ect, and the representatives needed a long time to travel to their districts and discuss things. The constitution talks about [I]the[/I] recess, as in one.[/QUOTE] according to the cbs article they were gone for 20 days on holiday but it was "technically" not a recess because they came and struck the gavel every once and a while in "pro forma" sessions. ie they were in recess but purposefully did the minimum amount of work necessary to stay in session to prevent obama from making any recess appointments [editline]26th January 2013[/editline] in which case i really don't care about this fiasco because it sounds like obama making a recess appointment only to find that the GOP was once again stalling everything he tries to do by avoiding a recess even though they weren't doing anything for 20 days

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39370226]according to the cbs article they were gone for 20 days on holiday but it was "technically" not a recess because they came and struck the gavel every once and a while in "pro forma" sessions. ie they were in recess but purposefully did the minimum amount of work necessary to stay in session to prevent obama from making any recess appointments[/QUOTE] Despite what their intentions actually were, it is not a recess until both houses say so. As I said before, Obama's appointment would have expired once congress resumed anyway. I think it is kind of scumbaggish that President Obama wanted to wait until he thought congress was in recess to appoint someone. Why couldn't he have just waited for congressional approval? [editline]26th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Kopimi;39370226]only to find that the GOP was once again stalling everything he tries to do by avoiding a recess even though they weren't doing anything for 20 days[/QUOTE] The democrats have the majority of the senate, and the GOP holds majority of the house by a slim margin. I think 53% or something like that. It is almost an even split.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39370247][B]Despite what their intentions actually were, it is not a recess until both houses say so[/B]. As I said before, Obama's appointment would have expired once congress resumed anyway.[/QUOTE] then i think rather than holding this up as an example of obama "violating the constitution", you should hold it up as an example of our laws and constitution being flawed to allow an obvious recess being avoided for political gain just so the GOP can avoid obama temporarily appointing someone to a needed position

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39370268] just so the GOP can avoid obama temporarily appointing someone to a needed position[/QUOTE] As I said, you have to remember that the GOP doesn't control the senate, and they barely control the house of representatives. So in reality this isn't really the GOP "gumming up the works," so to say, but someone pointing out an unconstitutional act. In my opinion, it was pretty much Obama trying to pull a fast one, either by mistake or on purpose, and he got caught.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39370308]As I said, you have to remember that the GOP doesn't control the senate, and they barely control the house of representatives. So in reality this isn't really the GOP "gumming up the works," so to say, but someone pointing out an unconstitutional act. In my opinion, it was pretty much Obama trying to pull a fast one, [B]either by mistake or on purpose[/B], and he got caught.[/QUOTE] if it was a mistake how could it be a fast one? the fact that the senate can go on holiday for 20 days and hold what are essentially imaginary meetings just to avoid recess being called in is ridiculous. not only that but there are 53 democrats in the senate and 45 republicans. the senate requires the majority of the senate be present to do business which means only a few democrats would need to attend these pro forma sessions to avoid congress going into recess. is there a site where i can check the attendance of these sessions? because i can't imagine any other reason to hold these pro forma sessions than to avoid going into recess and allowing recess appointments to be made and i have a feeling it wasn't 53 democrats who decided to pretend 20 days on holiday doesnt qualify as recess

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39370416]is there a site where i can check the attendance of these sessions?[/QUOTE] You could try looking on the congress.gov site. I've tried to take a look, but can't really seem to find anything. I think short of watch c-span 24/7, you wont really know what the attendence is. Sorry. :(

I really don't see what is so wrong about this

[QUOTE=Kopimi;39370268]then i think rather than holding this up as an example of obama "violating the constitution", you should hold it up as an example of our laws and constitution being flawed to allow an obvious recess being avoided for political gain just so the GOP can avoid obama temporarily appointing someone to a needed position[/QUOTE] i think both points are valid. obama violated the constitution and the house exploited the law for their own benefit.