Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (64311)	1/16/2012 8:33:39 PM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

There Was No Nomination of Cordray before the Senate… Posted by Mark A. Calabria Last week President Obama made the “recess” appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, created under the Dodd-Frank Act. I’ve already discussed some of the various problems with this so-called recess appointment. Another, perhaps ultimately more critical, problem is that at the time of this action, January 4th, 2012, there was not a pending nomination of Richard Cordray before the Senate. By the unanimous agreement of the Senate, his nomination was returned to the President on January 3rd, 2012, which for all purposes extinguishes said nomination. Per Paragraph 6 of Senate Rule XXXI, the President would have to re-submit Cordray’s nomination in order for it to be considered by the Senate. But then I guess if one doesn’t really believe the Senate was in session on January 3rd, despite marking the beginning of a new session, then I guess one might also not believe the Senate could have conducted any business that day, such as returning nominations to the President. Ironically enough, had the President made the appointment two days earlier, he would be on much stronger, if not still shaky ground. The President’s own attempt at being clever, by trying to gain another year of service for his nominations, may be what ultimately dooms said nominations. If indeed there was no pending Cordray nomination on January 4th, then following the decision of US District Court for DC in Olympic Federal Savings and Loan Association v. Director, Office of Thrift Supervision, it would seem pretty clear that Cordray’s appointment was unconstitutional. But then I’m no lawyer, so we will see. cato-at-liberty.org

To: Bill who wrote (64311)	1/17/2012 1:07:05 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Good catch, Bill: [Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.] And also: [Section Five, Clause 1: Qualifications of Members...Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.] Section Five states that a majority of each House constitutes a quorum to do business; a smaller number may adjourn the House or compel the attendance of absent members. Etc. So, YOU were correct that EACH house must give the OTHER permission to adorn (but only apparently after you looked into the matter and changed your posted views, remember FIRST you posted that you DISAGREED when I said that the Senate cannot adjourn without the permission of the House and that was INCORRECT. <g>) Your original reply (to the article I posted) contained a misunderstanding of what had been written because you apparently thought that someone had written that 'the House needed to be in recess for a recess appointment...' when in fact nothing of that kind had ever been written. Not by me, nor by the author of the article I posted. That much was pure and simple just a misunderstanding you had. See: Message 27879622 (Glad that this series of exchanges got us both to look into the matter and learn a few things though!)