Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vanity - Can DJT Leave a Cabinet Position Unfilled and Rule it by Decree?
Vanity ^ | 12/4/2024 | LRoggy

Posted on 12/04/2024 4:21:39 AM PST by LRoggy

I was wondering if the RINOs decided to gang up and not vote for the more important Trump supported Cabinet choices, what remedy could he have to keep those selections in charge.

Could he leave the slot open and announce his nominee is now a Special Advisor to him in charge of that department? Are there technical issues with that?

I'd rather leave a bunch of open vacancies than give in to the Establishment scum.

Would be enlightening to see if government works just as fine, and it would feed into the DOGE approach if little effect is seen.


TOPICS: History; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: gabbard; hegseth; patel; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last
Would like to hear about the legal/technical barriers to this strategy.
1 posted on 12/04/2024 4:21:39 AM PST by LRoggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

My essential understanding is that cabinet positions do not have to be fulfiled in an official sense, but can be filled by other people in addition to their own cabinet position. So, the Secretary of Transportation, for example, could be a collaborative effort between the other cabinet positions.


2 posted on 12/04/2024 4:23:50 AM PST by Jonty30 (Genghis Khan did not have the most descendants. His father had more. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

Just put someone temporarily there for 4 years..


3 posted on 12/04/2024 4:28:49 AM PST by roving (Deplorable MAGA Garbage )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

The President is the executive branch, he can leave any cabinet position open and direct the lower officers to run that department as he sees fit.


4 posted on 12/04/2024 4:29:47 AM PST by Farcesensitive (K is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

> Could he leave the slot open and announce his nominee is now a Special Advisor to him in charge of that department? <

Good question. My layman’s guess is that an Acting Secretary would work, but not a Special Advisor.

And that’s because a Special Advisor has no authority to issue orders to the department. So he certainly would be ignored by the rank-and-file in that department.

All a Special Advisor could do is report every last problem to Trump, and then Trump would have to issue the orders directly. Rather inefficient.


5 posted on 12/04/2024 4:31:00 AM PST by Leaning Right (It’s morning in America. Again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

How long can an Acting Secretary legally serve as the head of the department before requiring confirmation?


6 posted on 12/04/2024 4:36:04 AM PST by LRoggy (Peter's Son's Business )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

The only reason a CEO has managers under him is the way large organizations must be run. The leader sets the policies he thinks will lead to success. He chooses subordinates to implement those policies. The subordinate turns the leader’s ideas into real, functioning mechanisms. That job can be extremely complex. The subordinate saves the leader from getting mired in the weeds, which is what happens to over-controlling leaders. Even if the CEO wants to wind down and eventually delete a department, say Education, it takes someone to handle that so as to prevent a “leaving Afghanistan” level disaster.

Reagan’s success and Trump’s business success relied on finding the right people to turn policy into mechanism.


7 posted on 12/04/2024 4:37:52 AM PST by Gen.Blather (Wait! I said that out loud? )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

yes


8 posted on 12/04/2024 4:39:09 AM PST by kinsman redeemer (The real enemy seeks to devour what is good. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

Trump “Until my cabinet is in place I order all immigration ports closed and no entry by anyone other than citizens is probibitied entry to the United States. Thank you.”


9 posted on 12/04/2024 4:42:07 AM PST by wildcard_redneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

I think he can appointing acting members under the Vacancies Act. These people can serve for 210 days.


10 posted on 12/04/2024 4:47:49 AM PST by Fido969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

Hope you didn’t spend too many hours dreaming up this cr**.


11 posted on 12/04/2024 4:48:42 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy
Executive branch departments are generally established by acts of Congress and have specific provisions for filling top posts. The positions that require Senate confirmation are clearly described by law.

However, my understanding is that the President has a lot of leeway in changing the lines of succession in each department in the event a vacancy arises.

12 posted on 12/04/2024 4:48:58 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("Well, maybe I'm a little rough around the edges; inside a little hollow.” -- Tom Petty, “Rebels”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wildcard_redneck
Too many people enter legally day in and day out. Closing the border means closing the gaps between entries.

Love it that the courts told Biden that Texas could use the razor wire in the Rio Grande to stop them. I believe they're going to add more.

13 posted on 12/04/2024 4:52:06 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: LRoggy

Of course. A cabinet position is merely a department head operating under the President. The President is in charge of all Executive Branch departments.


15 posted on 12/04/2024 4:57:23 AM PST by HombreSecreto (The life of a repo man is always intense)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy; Sacajaweau

Maybe our FRiend S. was just having a bad morning. It happens. I for one very much appreciate these kinds of discussion posts. For one thing, I often learn something new and interesting.


16 posted on 12/04/2024 4:57:45 AM PST by Leaning Right (It’s morning in America. Again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

If there are no appointed leaders in place then he should halt Agency spending and everyone in the Agency gets terminated, effective immediately, and the Agency facilities and records revert to GSA and NARA.


17 posted on 12/04/2024 5:02:57 AM PST by Degaston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

Take a look at the Inspector General for the Department of State position when Hillary was in the position.

June 3, 2015

““Where Are All the Watchdogs?” to keep track of ongoing vacancies in the IG system. Our vacancy tracker shows how long IG offices have been headed by an acting official, and, in the case of IGs appointed by the President, how long a nominee has been waiting for Senate confirmation.

As of today,(June 3, 2015) there are seven vacancies at presidentially appointed IG positions, one vacancy at an agency-appointed position, and three nominees awaiting confirmation. The shortest vacancy is at the Central Intelligence Agency, which has gone 123 days without a permanent IG or a nominee. The longest vacancy is at the Interior Department, which has now gone almost 2,300 days without a permanent IG, making it the longest IG vacancy of the Obama Administration.”

The Department lacked a permanent watchdog for Hillary Clinton’s entire four-year tenure as Secretary of State, the longest vacancy since the position was created in 1957.

These excerpts are from an excellent article, written in 2015 on how Obama appointed “Acting” positions as watchdogs, thus bypassing senate approval.

https://www.pogo.org/testimonies/testimony-of-pogos-danielle-brian-on-watchdogs-needed-top-government-investigator-positions-left-unfilled-for-years


18 posted on 12/04/2024 5:03:10 AM PST by tired&retired (Blessings )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LRoggy

“Rule by decree” is not really the language you want to use in America.


19 posted on 12/04/2024 5:04:04 AM PST by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

> “Rule by decree” is not really the language you want to use in America. <

Ha, yes. A better term might be “govern by executive order”. Which is pretty much the same thing.


20 posted on 12/04/2024 5:13:18 AM PST by Leaning Right (It’s morning in America. Again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson