1
   

Obama Should Swear Off Executive Privilege

 
 
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2008 04:07 pm
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130094.html

Its an interesting article, but lets see if Obama will do it.
Somehow, I dont think he will.

Some excerpts...

Quote:
One way Obama could send a clear message about the type of service he'll expect from the people who will staff his administration is to make an early vow forbidding any of his staff from claiming executive privilege should they later be asked to testify before Congress, in a deposition, or in any other legal setting. The one obvious exception would be if someone were asked to testify about matters classified for national security purposes


Quote:
The president's political appointees are public servants. Their salaries are paid by taxpayers. What they do and say on the public payroll should be accessible to the public, to the courts, and to congressional oversight. If a presidential aide fears that advice he gives the president could subject him to legal action or congressional subpoena down the road, he shouldn't give advice that's of questionable legality or that's ethically dubious in the first place. It really is that simple. If the president wants to hire a personal attorney who can give him personal legal advice that's protected by attorney-client privilege, that's fine. He should pay that attorney out of his own pocket, or out of campaign funds.


Quote:
Bill Clinton invoked executive privilege to keep the health care task forces held by his wife Hillary Clinton shielded from federal open meetings laws. He would again invoke the doctrine to stymie investigations into Hillary Clinton's firing of White House Travel Office employees, and then again to prevent his aides from testifying in the Monica Lewinsky case (he lost that particular fight in court).

George W. Bush moved early to shore up executive privilege, blocking efforts to investigate his predecessor Clinton's role in the fundraising scandal involving campaign contributions from non-U.S. citizens. He also blocked investigations into Clinton Attorney General Janet Reno. Bush's non-partisan deference to presidential power reaped benefits, as he'd go on to invoke executive privilege to thwart attempts by Congress to look into his own administration's scandals, including the U.S. attorney firings, years of missing White House emails, and the cover-up of the friendly fire death of U.S. Army Ranger and former NFL star Pat Tillman.


Quote:
If Obama were to peremptorily swear off executive privilege early on in his administration, and vow that his staff and advisers will not have his permission to invoke it at a later date, it would not only send a clear and important message to the country that he plans to keep his vow to run a transparent and accountable government, it would also send a message to everyone working in his administration that what they say and do will be on the record, and that they should behave accordingly.


Does anyone think that Obama will actually do something like this, or will he keep it to use as his own shield later?
I personally think he will keep the privelege.

  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 672 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2008 04:14 pm
Where were you on the subject for the last eight years?
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2008 04:18 pm
@MontereyJack,
Since the article I linked to was just written, that sure sounds like a dumb question.

But to answer it for you, I have NEVER supported executive privelege, and you will find no statements from me anywhere on A2K where I have supported it.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2008 04:49 pm
Since the Bush administration has tried to shield just about all its activities from public scrutiny by invoking executive privilege since its first year in office, from the Cheney task force on energy to the evidence for and the deliberation on invading Iraq to presidential support for interrogation that violates the Geneva Conventions to unconstitutional interference with the Justice Department, this is hardly a new question, even if the article you cite was just written.

I find your sudden concern with Obama's possible approaches to executive privilege a little Johnny-come-lately. Whydidn't you make your position clear when Bush was abusing it? What about condemning him for it now, huh?
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2008 04:53 pm
He is already planning to do most of that, but as an open and transparent government that acts in the light of day rather than waiting to be questioned or investigated. He's being proactive rather than reactive on the issue.

You can read more about it and also listen to a speech on the subject here:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/

and here:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/fiscal/

0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2008 04:55 pm
@mysteryman,
Executive privilege vs a congress that is willing to investigate anything and everything.

Hmm... If the GOP takes control of the congress and doesn't ever ask for anyone from the administration to testify then I guess Obama won't have to claim it.

I find it interesting that the author thinks exec privilege was claimed for the health care meetings. The suit was filed under the open meeting laws and rejected under those. There was no exec privilege claim to my knowledge on those meetings.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama Should Swear Off Executive Privilege
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 02:26:04