Obama signs bill exempting presidential appointees from Senate confirmation

Daily Caller ^ | 8-11-12 | Paul Connor

[CottShop]

[[I see your point asking was it just for these vacant posts this time only, or for all future Presidents for these posts only? Without reading the bill, it’s probably the latter]]

as I see it (and i’m not saying I’m right as I don’t know for sure) congress woukld have had to either ammend or append the constitution in order for a declaration that all future presidents have the right to appoint without confirmation- The cofnirmation process it seems is a ‘safeguard’ against a presiodent who might try to become dictator- it’s aN effort to try to prevent regimes such as Assad’s regime where he simply appoints whomever he wishes whenever he wishes- it seems that our system was created to help try to balance power- to avoid giving all power to just one individual

[[Congress deemed these posts to be minor enough as to not warrant confirmation hearings.]]

That’s possible, but I’ve not read or heard where congress granted the dear leader this privilege, and if not, then his actions are essentially him spitting i nthe eye of thsoe who wrote our constitution and those who serve udner him and thus wiould be unconstitutional- but if this is infact what happened, and he acted unconstitutionally, the GOP has been silent on the issue simply allowing dear leader to do as he wishes-

[[Since no Congress can bind a future Congress, a future Congress can pass another bill retaking these nominations back for confirmation]]

I agree that that should and most liekly is the case