5 ms·
Since I'm seeing confusion about how this has occurred in various comments: this is actually not a failure of the executive branch/presidential administration.
by tammer 9y ago
Since I'm seeing confusion about how this has occurred in various comments: this is actually not a failure of the executive branch/presidential administration. The American system is defined by a system of "checks and balances" — meaning that the legislature has full power to veto appointees to these departments and even impeach the president. What we're witnessing is a critical vulnerability in this system — when two branches of American government no longer work in the interest of the country, the only remaining check is public elections. These are slow to occur and can be manipulated in plethora ways.
So the issue here is a legislature that has coordinated against the interests of the country and its people for the betterment of themselves and the few who fund them. Keep that in mind, and direct anger and action there.
- rgbrenner 9y agoMulvaney is the acting head of the CFPB.. meaning he was not confirmed by the Senate. Trump appointed him, and he leads the agency. That's it. I'm going to assume you weren't aware of that... and not--as Trump likes to do--pointing fingers at others for Trump's failures.
- asciimo 9y agoYes, that's true--the malware installed in our government has done some bad things that need to be discussed. But we also have to address the vulnerability that resulted in its installation.
- evan_ 9y agoTo continue the metaphor: From the perspective of the malware, the bugs are features
- wu-ikkyu 9y agoWhat is the scope of the vulnerability?
- defterGoose 9y agoWell, ok. But if people were more interested in having reasoned debates on policy than coming up with tenuous metaphors, maybe we wouldn't have so many problems.
- aweiland 9y agoThe tradition is that acting heads typically don't make any policy (because they haven't been through the advice/consent process). It seems a little different in this administration.
- outsidetheparty 9y ago> the issue here is a legislature that has coordinated against the interests of the country and its people for the betterment of themselves and the few who fund them In... what way exactly? The Equifax breach is a pretty great example of exactly why the CFPB is needed, Trump's appointee is trying to line-item-veto it out of existence, and you're calling for directed anger against the "legislature"?
- s73ver_ 9y agoThe Congress has the Constitutional Responsibility to act as a check on the Executive Branch, through several means, up to and including impeachment of the Executive. Trump has done several things this past year alone that would have led to censure or impeachment had they been done by past Presidents. If Congress refuses to fulfill its duty, then they deserve the anger they are receiving.
- outsidetheparty 9y agoI agree that any responsible, sane congress would have impeached Trump several iterations of "new groundbreaking violation of democratic norms" ago. (And to be quite clear, this rests entirely at the feet of the current majority party: a democratic-led congress would have acted long ago.) But that doesn't have anything to do with the comment I was responding to. What we're discussing here is an action by a Trump appointee, who was not confirmed by the senate (Mulvaney is an "acting" head). The blame for that action lies with Trump and with Mulvaney. It does not lie with the congress that failed to prevent it. The grandparent argument appears to boil down to "Trump & team did evil. Congress failed to prevent them from getting away with it. Therefore direct your anger toward congress." That's just an inch or two from complete nonsense.
- s73ver_ 9y agoEh, I feel one can be just as angry/outraged at Trump & Team as they can be at Congress for letting them get away with it. That, and given the upcoming midterm elections, I feel I have more influence on Congress (or at least my Congressional delegation) than I do on Trump & Friends.
- kodablah 9y ago> when two branches of American government no longer work in the interest of the country Are they objectively not or are you basing it on what you consider the interest of the country?
- marnett 9y agowhat do you consider the interests of the country?
- fjsolwmv 9y agoUnless you can show that the GOP Congress has low approval rating from the manority of active voters that casted votes in favor of them, there is no failure of checks and balances, and democracy is working as intended.