quote:

This pattern of being merely present has been apparent almost since the first days of the Obama presidency. He may unveil his mighty teleprompter to help pass what Congress has drafted, but this White House seems strangely disconnected from crafting legislation. For example, last year's stimulus was largely drafted by House Appropriations Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin, one of Congress's most liberal members. As a result, what passed was a wasteful spending bill rather than an economic growth package.
...
On other controversies—the attempt of high-ranking aides to entice candidates not to challenge incumbent Democratic senators, the details of cap-and-trade legislation, the resolution of big conflicts between the House and Senate versions of financial regulation, and the drafting of comprehensive immigration reform—Mr. Obama appears to be removed, distant and detached, unwilling or unable to provide the adult supervision Washington requires.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

One might ask whether the Executive branch is the responsible party to "provide the adult supervision Washington [Congress?] requires." I suspect if you look back, Presidents like Ronald Reagan were just as detached from the legislative process as the current administration.

It is the job of the legislature to legislate. Mr Rowe notes: " For example, last year's stimulus was largely drafted by House Appropriations Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin"...eh hum. That is was Appropriations Chairmen do....

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

One might ask whether the Executive branch is the responsible party to "provide the adult supervision Washington [Congress?] requires." I suspect if you look back, Presidents like Ronald Reagan were just as detached from the legislative process as the current administration.

It is the job of the legislature to legislate. Mr Rowe notes: " For example, last year's stimulus was largely drafted by House Appropriations Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin"...eh hum. That is was Appropriations Chairmen do....

quote:

ORIGINAL: StephK

He didn't show up for his job in the Senate. Remember he was running a presidential campaign that would give him the executive experience to be the POTUS.

quote:

I don't think any sitting candidate should be allowed to campaign while their position is in session. If they don't show up for their current job they for sure won't show up for the job they are campaigning for to win.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rlj

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

One might ask whether the Executive branch is the responsible party to "provide the adult supervision Washington [Congress?] requires." I suspect if you look back, Presidents like Ronald Reagan were just as detached from the legislative process as the current administration.

It is the job of the legislature to legislate. Mr Rowe notes: " For example, last year's stimulus was largely drafted by House Appropriations Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin"...eh hum. That is was Appropriations Chairmen do....

An impression that I have always had was some of the recent presidents anyway were more involved in the "drafting process". (For lack of a better word) The Clintons were very involved in the Health Care debate, W was pretty involved in the tax cuts, the Medicare prescriptions and tried to get things rolling with immigration. That is my impression of a few things off of the top of my head and I can't say for sure whether I am right or wrong. At this point I believe that the previous presidents I mentioned introduced legislation and the two houses of Congress went from there.

As for the stimulus itself I didn't like the amount spent vs. the return which is why I always called it the Porkulous. I still consider that mess to be a big, huge, colossal earmark that isn't attached to any legislation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: _jjp_

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

One might ask whether the Executive branch is the responsible party to "provide the adult supervision Washington [Congress?] requires." I suspect if you look back, Presidents like Ronald Reagan were just as detached from the legislative process as the current administration.

It is the job of the legislature to legislate. Mr Rowe notes: " For example, last year's stimulus was largely drafted by House Appropriations Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin"...eh hum. That is was Appropriations Chairmen do....

Then how about focusing on the fact that when he was in the legislative branch he didn't bother to legislate but would instead just show up?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rlj

quote:

I don't think any sitting candidate should be allowed to campaign while their position is in session. If they don't show up for their current job they for sure won't show up for the job they are campaigning for to win.

I've thought of this myself to and I agree with your sentiments.

Unfortunately though the power to make that decision is ultimately up to the voters. : / It does make me wonder if in some states the people couldn't put some of this up for a vote. I don't know if it could be done on a federal level.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

That's a fair point...when Obama was a legilature. But Rowe was implying a President's duty is to oversee the legislative process.

quote:

ORIGINAL: _jjp_

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

That's a fair point...when Obama was a legilature. But Rowe was implying a President's duty is to oversee the legislative process.

If the president wants to claim the legislation as his own, as Obama does with his initiatives then he either better be prepared to be a part of the crafting of the bill or he better not whine when he is called to task for it's contents. He doesn't get to have his cake and eat it too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rlj

quote:

ORIGINAL: _jjp_

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

That's a fair point...when Obama was a legilature. But Rowe was implying a President's duty is to oversee the legislative process.

If the president wants to claim the legislation as his own, as Obama does with his initiatives then he either better be prepared to be a part of the crafting of the bill or he better not whine when he is called to task for it's contents. He doesn't get to have his cake and eat it too.

I agree with jjp. I also was of the opinion (and it's probably wrong) that the White House gives at least some degree of input on legislation it claims is important. I thought that was the case going back to Reagan.

Am I wrong?

quote:

ORIGINAL: wing2000

Personally, I wish the POTUS had line item veto power. It would go a long way toward triming last minute pork thrown into bills.

quote:

Executive Orders are controversial because they allow the President to make major decisions, even law, without the consent of Congress. This, of course, runs against the general logic of the Constitution -- that no one should have power to act unilaterally.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sharonjef2007

As much as I don't like the direction Obama is taking our country, I don't agree with Rove here and say that he is absent in the process.

Legislative Branch of Government: Makes Laws
Executive Branch of Governement: Enforces Laws
Supreme Court in Government: Decides the Constitutionality of Laws

It is NOT the job of the POTUS to make laws or to run the country or any of that. Each person and each branch has it's own responsibilities. The POTUS has a long list of job duties in his/her job description, but writing laws is not one of them. I feel Presidents in the past who have been more active in that area have over stepped the boundries of their job. The POTUS is NOT the boss or such of the Legislature. All three branches were supposed to be equal in their power and checks/balances in governing the country.

People say the Supreme Court has too much power, and I sort of agree. But it is the POTUS that I think has run way too far beyond what the job was originally intended for. I'd say with the way President Obama "runs" the Legislature and tells them to do certain things and all that kind of stuff, he is actually too involved in the legislative process. If he wanted to write laws or get his colleagues to write laws, he should have stayed in the Senate.